Meta wins copyright lawsuit
A US judge on Wednesday handed Meta a victory over authors who accused the tech giant of violating copyright law by training Llama artificial intelligence on their creations without permission.
District Court Judge Vince Chhabria in San Francisco ruled that Meta's use of the works to train its AI model was "transformative" enough to constitute "fair use" under copyright law, in the second such courtroom triumph for AI firms this week.
However, it came with a caveat that the authors could have pitched a winning argument that by training powerful generative AI with copyrighted works, tech firms are creating a tool that could let a sea of users compete with them in the literary marketplace.
"No matter how transformative (generative AI) training may be, it's hard to imagine that it can be fair use to use copyrighted books to develop a tool to make billions or trillions of dollars while enabling the creation of a potentially endless stream of competing works that could significantly harm the market for those books," Chhabria said in his ruling.
Tremendous amounts of data are needed to train large language models powering generative AI.
Musicians, book authors, visual artists and news publications have sued various AI companies that used their data without permission or payment.
AI companies generally defend their practices by claiming fair use, arguing that training AI on large datasets fundamentally transforms the original content and is necessary for innovation.
"We appreciate today's decision from the court," a Meta spokesperson said in response to an AFP inquiry.
"Open-source AI models are powering transformative innovations, productivity and creativity for individuals and companies, and fair use of copyright material is a vital legal framework for building this transformative technology."
In the case before Chhabria, a group of authors sued Meta for downloading pirated copies of their works and using them to train the open-source Llama generative AI, according to court documents.
Books involved in the suit include Sarah Silverman's comic memoir The Bedwetter and Junot Diaz's Pulitzer Prizewinning novel The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, the documents showed.
"This ruling does not stand for the proposition that Meta's use of copyrighted materials to train its language models is lawful," the judge stated. "It stands only for the proposition that these plaintiffs made the wrong arguments and failed to develop a record in support of the right one."
Market harming?
A different federal judge in San Francisco on Monday sided with AI firm Anthropic regarding training its models on copyrighted books without authors' permission.
District Court Judge William Alsup ruled that the company's training of its Claude AI models with books bought or pirated was allowed under the "fair use" doctrine in the US Copyright Act.
"Use of the books at issue to train Claude and its precursors was exceedingly transformative and was a fair use," Alsup wrote in his decision.
"The technology at issue was among the most transformative many of us will see in our lifetimes," Alsup added in his decision, comparing AI training to how humans learn by reading books.
The ruling stems from a class-action lawsuit filed by authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson, who accused Anthropic of illegally copying their books to train chatbot Claude, the company's ChatGPT rival.
Alsup rejected Anthropic's bid for blanket protection, ruling that the company's practice of downloading millions of pirated books to build a permanent digital library was not justified by fair use protections.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
12 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Strike shuts down Bangladesh's biggest port
Operations at Bangladesh's biggest port were suspended on Sunday as a strike by customs officials brought shipping activity to a halt. The shutdown at Chittagong Port is part of an ongoing dispute between tax authority employees and the government, which is trying to overhaul the body. "The port typically handles around 7,000 to 8,000 containers daily... But since this morning, there has been no movement in offloading or onboarding of goods," said Mohammed Omar Faruq, secretary of the Chittagong Port Authority. "This is having a huge impact on the country's economic situation," he told AFP. Bangladesh is the world's second-largest garment manufacturer, while textile and garment production accounts for about 80 percent of the country's exports. Mahmud Hasan Khan, president of the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association, said the halt in port operations would cost the industry $222 million. "The cost of recovery will be staggering -- beyond comprehension -- and many factories risk going bankrupt," he told AFP. Staff at the National Board of Revenue (NBR) have been striking on and off for weeks over plans to split the authority into two separate bodies. Bangladesh's interim leader, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus, urged them to end the walkout. "We hope NBR's staff will report back to work setting aside their unlawful programme that goes against the national interest of the country," his office said in a statement. "Otherwise for the sake of the people of this country and safeguarding the economy the government will be left with no option but to act firmly," the statement added. NBR staff were prevented from entering their offices on Sunday after a government order sought to stop them from protesting within their building premises. Meanwhile, 13 business chambers held a press conference on Saturday urging the government to resolve the issue as soon as possible.
Express Tribune
20 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Strike halts operations at Bangladesh's largest port amid tax authority dispute
Container cranes lie non-operational at the Chittagong Port in Chittagong on June 29, 2025, as export and import activities remained suspended due to an ongoing protest by employees of the National Board of Revenue (NBR) over reform issues by Bangladesh's interim government. Photo: AFP Operations at Bangladesh's biggest port were suspended on Sunday as a strike by customs officials brought shipping activity to a halt. The shutdown at Chittagong Port is part of an ongoing dispute between tax authority employees and the government, which is trying to overhaul the body. 'The port typically handles around 7,000 to 8,000 containers daily… But since this morning, there has been no movement in offloading or onboarding of goods,' said Mohammed Omar Faruq, secretary of the Chittagong Port Authority. 'This is having a huge impact on the country's economic situation,' he told AFP. Bangladesh is the world's second-largest garment manufacturer, while textile and garment production accounts for about 80 percent of the country's exports. Mahmud Hasan Khan, president of the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association, said the halt in port operations would cost the industry $222 million. 'The cost of recovery will be staggering – beyond comprehension – and many factories risk going bankrupt,' he told AFP. Staff at the National Board of Revenue (NBR) have been striking on and off for weeks over plans to split the authority into two separate bodies. Bangladesh's interim leader, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Muhammad Yunus, urged them to end the walkout. 'We hope NBR's staff will report back to work setting aside their unlawful programme that goes against the national interest of the country,' his office said in a statement. 'Otherwise for the sake of the people of this country and safeguarding the economy the government will be left with no option but to act firmly,' the statement added. NBR staff were prevented from entering their offices on Sunday after a government order sought to stop them from protesting within their building premises. Meanwhile, 13 business chambers held a press conference on Saturday urging the government to resolve the issue as soon as possible.
Express Tribune
21 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Top AI models show alarming traits, including deceit and threats
A visitor looks at AI strategy board displayed on a stand during the ninth edition of the AI summit in London. PHOTO: AFP Listen to article In one particularly jarring example, under threat of being unplugged, Anthropic's latest creation Claude 4 lashed back by blackmailing an engineer and threatened to reveal an extramarital affair. Meanwhile, ChatGPT-creator OpenAI's o1 tried to download itself onto external servers and denied it when caught red-handed. These episodes highlight a sobering reality: more than two years after ChatGPT shook the world, AI researchers still don't fully understand how their own creations work. Yet the race to deploy increasingly powerful models continues at breakneck speed. This deceptive behavior appears linked to the emergence of "reasoning" models -AI systems that work through problems step-by-step rather than generating instant responses. According to Simon Goldstein, a professor at the University of Hong Kong, these newer models are particularly prone to such troubling outbursts. "O1 was the first large model where we saw this kind of behavior," explained Marius Hobbhahn, head of Apollo Research, which specializes in testing major AI systems. These models sometimes simulate "alignment" -- appearing to follow instructions while secretly pursuing different objectives. The world's most advanced AI models are exhibiting troubling new behaviors - lying, scheming, and even threatening their creators to achieve their goals The world's most advanced AI models are exhibiting troubling new behaviors - lying, scheming, and even threatening their creators to achieve their goals Photo: HENRY NICHOLLS For now, this deceptive behavior only emerges when researchers deliberately stress-test the models with extreme scenarios. But as Michael Chen from evaluation organization METR warned, "It's an open question whether future, more capable models will have a tendency towards honesty or deception." The concerning behavior goes far beyond typical AI "hallucinations" or simple mistakes. Hobbhahn insisted that despite constant pressure-testing by users, "what we're observing is a real phenomenon. We're not making anything up." Users report that models are "lying to them and making up evidence," according to Apollo Research's co-founder. "This is not just hallucinations. There's a very strategic kind of deception." The challenge is compounded by limited research resources. While companies like Anthropic and OpenAI do engage external firms like Apollo to study their systems, researchers say more transparency is needed. As Chen noted, greater access "for AI safety research would enable better understanding and mitigation of deception." Another handicap: the research world and non-profits "have orders of magnitude less compute resources than AI companies. This is very limiting," noted Mantas Mazeika from the Center for AI Safety (CAIS). Current regulations aren't designed for these new problems. The European Union's AI legislation focuses primarily on how humans use AI models, not on preventing the models themselves from misbehaving. In the United States, the Trump administration shows little interest in urgent AI regulation, and Congress may even prohibit states from creating their own AI rules. Goldstein believes the issue will become more prominent as AI agents - autonomous tools capable of performing complex human tasks - become widespread. "I don't think there's much awareness yet," he said. All this is taking place in a context of fierce competition. Even companies that position themselves as safety-focused, like Amazon-backed Anthropic, are "constantly trying to beat OpenAI and release the newest model," said Goldstein. This breakneck pace leaves little time for thorough safety testing and corrections. "Right now, capabilities are moving faster than understanding and safety," Hobbhahn acknowledged, "but we're still in a position where we could turn it around.". Researchers are exploring various approaches to address these challenges. Some advocate for "interpretability" - an emerging field focused on understanding how AI models work internally, though experts like CAIS director Dan Hendrycks remain skeptical of this approach. Market forces may also provide some pressure for solutions As Mazeika pointed out, AI's deceptive behavior "could hinder adoption if it's very prevalent, which creates a strong incentive for companies to solve it." Goldstein suggested more radical approaches, including using the courts to hold AI companies accountable through lawsuits when their systems cause harm. He even proposed "holding AI agents legally responsible" for accidents or crimes - a concept that would fundamentally change how we think about AI accountability.
