Competitor's use of copyrighted material to train a legal research AI tool was not fair use—but questions remain for other AI cases The district court's ruling is surely only the first round in the ...

AI thrives on data but feeding it the right data is harder than it seems. As enterprises scale their AI initiatives, they face the challenge of managing diverse data pipelines, ensuring proximity to ...

On Tuesday, February 11, a Delaware district court issued much-awaited summary-judgment decisions in Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH et al v. ROSS Intelligence Inc., No. 1:20-cv-613, ...

Artificial intelligence company Ross Intelligence, which sells legal research tools, is seeking to immediately appeal a landmark ruling that it infringed copyright by training its service on material ...

In the first AI copyright case ruling, a court concludes that training an AI system using copyrighted material isn't fair use. That will likely be cited by creators ...

In what appears to be a first, a federal judge has found that an artificial intelligence company infringed copyright by training its service on material it didn't own. The ruling, issued Tuesday by ...

“Judge Bibas’ summary judgment rulings are doctrinally flawed… ROSS contends, because neither opinion answered the central question of factor one.” Yesterday, artificial intelligence (AI) developer ...

You're currently following this author! Want to unfollow? Unsubscribe via the link in your email. Content and technology conglomerate Thomson Reuters this week scored the first big win in a US ...

A US judge has ruled in favor of Thomson Reuters in a AI training fight against Ross Intelligence, a legal AI startup, according to The Verge. Thomson Reuters sued Ross Intelligence in 2020 for using ...

A cutting-edge quantum chip showcases the next generation of computing technology. (Mark Hebert/Courthouse News) PHILADELPHIA (CN) — A defunct artificial intelligence company aimed at aiding legal ...

On Sept. 25, Judge Stephanos Bibas (sitting by designation in the District of Delaware), determined that fact questions surrounding issues of fair use and tortious interference required a jury to ...