- A Delaware judge has ruled that Ross Intelligence is liable for copyright infringement, marking a significant moment in the ongoing debate about AI training methods. The lawsuit, filed by Thomson Reuters, claims Ross used its Westlaw database without permission.
- Ross’s defense argued fair use allowed the company to use copyrighted material to train its AI.
- This ruling could have a significant impact on future cases involving companies like OpenAI and Microsoft.
Full Story
A Delaware judge has delivered a landmark ruling that could significantly impact the way artificial intelligence companies train their models. On Tuesday, Feb. 11, Thomson Reuters secured a major victory against an AI startup, Ross Intelligence, which was accused of using copyrighted work without permission.
Ross Intelligence liable for copyright infringement
Judge Stephanos Bibas ruled that Ross Intelligence is liable for copyright infringement, rejecting the company’s defense claims.
Bibas stated, “None of Ross’s possible defenses holds water. I reject them all.”
The lawsuit, filed in 2020, predates the ongoing debate over the use of copyrighted data by AI companies.
“We are pleased that the court granted summary judgment in our favor and concluded that Westlaw’s editorial content created and maintained by our attorney editors, is protected by copyright and cannot be used without our consent. The copying of our content was not ‘fair use.’“
Statement by Thomson Reuters spokesperson
Copyright law and fair use debate
Under U.S. law, copyright owners have control over their work, allowing them to sell and distribute it. However, the fair use doctrine provides an exception, allowing certain uses without permission, such as for research or teaching.
Thomson Reuters’ Westlaw database is a widely used tool that summarizes legal rulings. Ross Intelligence attempted to license Westlaw’s content but was denied due to being a direct competitor.
Court documents later revealed that Ross obtained its data from LegalEASE, a company using bulk memos containing information from Westlaw.
Ross’s cofounder publicly denied the allegations in a blog post, claiming the lawsuit was an attempt to hinder his company’s growth. Despite the defense, Ross announced months later it was shutting down its operations, saying the lawsuit had crippled the business.
Ross Intelligence argued its use of Thomson Reuters’ Westlaw database to train its AI models fell under fair use. However, the court disagreed, ruling the company’s actions did not meet the criteria for fair use.
Impact on future cases
This decision marks the first ruling of its kind regarding fair use and AI, which could influence future legal battles surrounding AI training methods. The case is particularly notable given its timing, potentially impacting the rise of AI systems like ChatGPT.
Get up to speed on the stories leading the day every weekday morning. Sign up for the newsletter today!
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
The ruling could have significant ramifications for high-profile cases, such as the ongoing lawsuit between OpenAI and The New York Times, which accuses OpenAI of using its copyrighted content to train its models.
While the judge’s decision on copyright infringement is a major development, the case is not over. The matter will still proceed to a jury trial to determine the full extent of the damages. Ross Intelligence did not respond to requests for comment regarding the ruling.
[Karah Rucker]
A DELAWARE JUDGE JUST HANDED DOWN A LANDMARK RULING THAT COULD IMPACT HOW ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE COMPANIES TRAIN THEIR MODELS.
ON TUESDAY, THOMSON REUTERS WON A CRUCIAL VICTORY AGAINST AN A-I STARTUP ACCUSED OF STEALING THEIR WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION
JUDGE STEPHANOS BIBAS RULED AGAINST ROSS INTELLIGENCE, SAYING THEY ARE LIABLE FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.
BIBAS WROTE, “NONE OF ROSS’S POSSIBLE DEFENSES HOLDS WATER. I REJECT THEM ALL.”
THIS LAWSUIT WAS FILED IN 2020, WELL BEFORE THE GROWING DEBATE OVER COMPANIES USING COPYRIGHTED DATA TO TRAIN AI.
U.S. LAW TYPICALLY GIVES OWNERS CONTROL OVER THEIR WORK—ALLOWING THEM TO SELL OR DISTRIBUTE IT, WHILE ALSO PREVENTING OTHERS FROM COPYING IT WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION.
EXCEPT IN THE CASE OF FAIR USE, WHICH WE’LL GET TO IN A MINUTE.
THOMSON REUTERS SUED ROSS INTELLIGENCE, CLAIMING ROSS USED ONE OF ITS PRODUCTS TO CREATE A NEW LEGAL RESEARCH ENGINE. THOMSON REUTERS’ WESTLAW DATABASE SUMMARIZES LEGAL RULINGS.
ROSS HAD TRIED TO LICENSE WESTLAW’S CONTENT. BUT THOMSON REUTERS DENIED THEM AS A DIRECT COMPETITOR.
COURT DOCUMENTS LATER SHOWED ROSS THEN GOT ITS DATA FROM LEGAL EASE, WHICH USED BULK MEMOS CONTAINING INFORMATION FROM WESTLAW.
ROSS’S CO FOUNDER PUBLICLY DENIED THE ALLEGATIONS IN A BLOG POST–SAYING THE LAWSUIT WAS A WEAPON TO STUNT HIS COMPANY’S GROWTH. MONTHS LATER, ROSS ANNOUNCED IT WAS SHUTTING DOWN ITS OPERATIONS, CRIPPLED BY THE LAWSUIT.
ROSS’S FAILED ARGUMENT WAS THAT FAIR USE ALLOWED IT TO USE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL BECAUSE ITS A-I MODEL USED IT TO LEARN FROM AND GENERATE NEW CONTENT.
FAIR USE ALLOWS THE USE OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL WITHOUT PERMISSION IN SOME CASES, LIKE TEACHING AND RESEARCH.
A THOMSON REUTERS SPOKESPERSON TOLD STRAIGHT ARROW NEWS, THEY ARE THANKFUL THE COURTS, “concluded that Westlaw’s editorial content created and maintained by our attorney editors, is protected by copyright and cannot be used without our consent. The copying of our content was not ‘fair use.’”
THIS IS THE FIRST DECISION OF ITS KIND DEALING WITH FAIR USE AND A-I. THE LAWSUIT ORIGINATED TWO YEARS BEFORE CHATGPT EVEN CAME ON THE SCENE.
BUT TUESDAY’S DECISION WILL WEIGH ON ONGOING AND FUTURE LAWSUITS RELATED TO HOW TECH COMPANIES LIKE OPENAI AND MICROSOFT TRAIN A-I MODELS.
A HIGH PROFILE CASE INCLUDES OPENAI AND THE NEW YORK TIMES. THE NEW YORK TIMES CLAIMS OPENAI SCRAPED ITS COPYRIGHTED CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION TO TRAIN ITS SYSTEMS.
AS FAR AS THE THOMSON REUTERS CASE GOES, THE JUDGE’S DECISION IS A PARTIAL JUDGMENT. THE CASE WILL STILL GO IN FRONT OF A JURY TO SETTLE THE CASE.
ROSS INTELLIGENCE DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR REQUEST FOR COMMENT REGARDING THE RULING.
FOR STRAIGHT ARROW NEWS, I’M KARAH RUCKER.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
