How are copyright holders to prove their works were used to train AI models if the details about the vast data sets used for such training are kept secret? That’s a dilemma that surfaced in late August when a federal judge dismissed a claim of direct infringement raised by a group of authors.
As AI becomes more sophisticated at detecting fakes, it is not just changing how brands protect themselves — it has the potential to change the legal framework for determining when platforms themselves might be held responsible for the counterfeits sold on their sites.
Stop running pilot after pilot with different tools but failing to move beyond testing. Start with business outcomes. Redesign processes and guardrails. Rethink pricing models. And then, with clarity of purpose, choose the tools that enable the future of legal work.
How are copyright holders to prove their works were used to train AI models if the details about the vast data sets used for such training are kept secret? That dilemma surfaced when a California federal judge recently dismissed a claim of direct infringement raised by a group of authors.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is permeating every phase of construction — redefining how buildings and projects are designed, managed, and maintained. This article offers practical analysis, sample clauses, and insights into how AI-specific contract terms can mitigate risk and facilitate responsible innovation.
Two judges in the Northern District of California recently issued groundbreaking summary judgment rulings regarding whether an artificial intelligence company’s scraping and ingestion of copyrighted works to train its LLMs qualified as fair use. Both decisions carry potentially seismic importance for AI companies and intellectual property litigators.
The end of Google page one is not the end of discovery. It is the beginning of a new discovery model — one where the winners are those who align with how buyers actually search, learn, and decide in the age of AI.
Instead of eliminating legal jobs, generative AI can be transformative for the in-house role by stripping away repetitive tasks and giving lawyers room to focus on higher-value work.
A trademark battle that pitted technology giant OpenAI against a company known as Open AI (note the space between the terms) has resulted in a summary judgment that has ordered the smaller enterprise to cease use of the name and its prized internet real estate, open.ai.
In late July, two important decisions came down from courts in the Northern District of California regarding the unauthorized use of copyrighted material for the training of large language models. No real consensus has emerged as to the effect they will have on the broader AI litigation landscape.
