Legal experts said there are key differences in Thomson Reuters' case against Ross Intelligence and other major AI-related copyright litigation.

The Thomson Reuters decision has big implications for the battle between generative AI companies and rights holders.

A federal judge in Delaware on Tuesday said that a former competitor of Thomson Reuters was not permitted by U.S. copyright law to copy the information and technology company's content to build a competing artificial intelligence-based legal platform.

A judge looked at possible copyright infringement defenses for Ross Intelligence and said, ‘I reject them all.’

Thomson Reuters has won an early battle in court over the question of fair use in artificial intelligence-related copyright cases.The media and technology company filed a lawsuit against Ross Intelligence — a now-defunct legal research firm — in 2020,

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 the company’s legal research platform Westlaw to train Ross Intelligence’s AI without permission.

An AI company lifted material from Thomson Reuters' research platform, arguing fair use and innocent infringement. A court has ruled it was copyright violation.

The judge rules that replicating human-authored content without permission does not qualify as 'fair use' of AI under copyright law.

And yet, the cautious approach to AI that persists at the top of some law firms shows that managing partners who still worry about moving too early are overlooking the significant

As Wired notes, the judgment blows a hole in the AI industry’s fair use defense. The industry has used fair use (the same parody laws that birthed “ Dumb Starbucks “) to claim that what they do, e.g.,