Latest news with #CaliforniaSuperiorCourt
Mint
5 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Reddit says Anthropic used its community to train AI without permission, files lawsuit
Social media platform Reddit has launched legal proceedings against artificial intelligence company Anthropic, accusing the firm of unlawfully scraping user-generated content to train its AI assistant, Claude. Filed on Wednesday in the California Superior Court in San Francisco, the lawsuit alleges that Anthropic used automated tools to extract Reddit users' comments without permission, despite being explicitly told not to do so. According to Reddit, this content was then used to train the Claude chatbot, without user consent or proper licensing. You may be interested in 'AI companies should not be allowed to scrape information and content from people without clear limitations on how they can use that data,' said Reddit's Chief Legal Officer, Ben Lee. He emphasised the platform's commitment to safeguarding its community, which generates vast volumes of public discourse each day. Reddit, which went public last year, has previously struck licensing deals with AI developers such as OpenAI and Google. These arrangements, the company says, allow for transparent and lawful use of data while enabling user protections like content deletion and spam prevention. 'These partnerships allow us to enforce meaningful safeguards for our users,' Lee added, underlining the contrast between authorised data access and Anthropic's alleged misconduct. Anthropic, founded by ex-OpenAI executives in 2021 and now backed heavily by Amazon, denies the allegations. 'We disagree with Reddit's claims and will defend ourselves vigorously,' the company said in a brief statement. The legal complaint takes a different route from other recent cases involving AI firms. Rather than alleging copyright infringement, as seen in lawsuits from music publishers targeting Claude for replicating song lyrics, Reddit's filing focuses on breach of contract and unfair competition. Specifically, it accuses Anthropic of violating Reddit's terms of service by scraping data without a proper license. The lawsuit cites a 2021 research paper co-authored by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, in which Reddit's subforums were explicitly mentioned as high-quality sources for training AI systems. Forums covering topics like gardening, history, and personal advice were listed as especially valuable for modelling human language patterns. Anthropic has previously claimed, including in a 2023 letter to the US Copyright Office, that its methods of training Claude constitute lawful use, describing them as a form of statistical analysis rather than reproduction of content.
Yahoo
27-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
DoorDash seeks dismissal of Uber lawsuit
DoorDash has asked a California Superior Court judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Uber that accuses the food delivery company of stifling competition by intimidating restaurant owners into exclusive deals. DoorDash argues in its motion that Uber's claim lacks merit on all fronts. On a post on its website on Friday, DoorDash said, "the lawsuit is nothing more than a cynical and calculated scare tactic from a frustrated competitor seeking to avoid real competition. It's disappointing behavior from a company once known for competing on the merits of its products and innovation." In its post, DoorDash added that it will "vigorously" defend itself, and positioned the company as one that "competes fiercely yet fairly to deliver exceptional value to merchants." A hearing has been set for July 11 in California Superior Court in San Francisco County. Uber filed its lawsuit against DoorDash in February. The ride-hailing giant alleged DoorDash, which holds the largest share of the food delivery market in the U.S., threatens restaurants with multimillion-dollar penalties or the removal or demotion of the businesses' position on the DoorDash app. Uber responded to the DoorDash request in a statement sent to TechCrunch. "It seems like the team at DoorDash is having a hard time understanding the content of our Complaint," reads the emailed statement from Uber. "When restaurants are forced to choose between unfair terms or retaliation, that's not competition — it's coercion. Uber will continue to stand up for merchants and for a level playing field. We look forward to presenting the facts in court." Uber requested a jury trial in its original complaint. The company has not specified the amount of damages it is seeking. Separately, Deliveroo confirmed Friday that DoorDash offered to buy the European food delivery company for $3.6 billion. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
26-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
DoorDash seeks dismissal of Uber lawsuit
DoorDash has asked a California Superior Court judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Uber that accuses the food delivery company of stifling competition by intimidating restaurant owners into exclusive deals. DoorDash argues in its motion that Uber's claim lacks merit on all fronts. On a post on its website on Friday, DoorDash said, "the lawsuit is nothing more than a cynical and calculated scare tactic from a frustrated competitor seeking to avoid real competition. It's disappointing behavior from a company once known for competing on the merits of its products and innovation." In its post, DoorDash added that it will "vigorously" defend itself, and positioned the company as one that "competes fiercely yet fairly to deliver exceptional value to merchants." A hearing has been set for July 11 in California Superior Court in San Francisco County. Uber filed its lawsuit against DoorDash in February. The ride-hailing giant alleged DoorDash, which holds the largest share of the food delivery market in the U.S., threatens restaurants with multimillion-dollar penalties or the removal or demotion of the businesses' position on the DoorDash app. Uber responded to the DoorDash request in a statement sent to TechCrunch. "It seems like the team at DoorDash is having a hard time understanding the content of our Complaint," reads the emailed statement from Uber. "When restaurants are forced to choose between unfair terms or retaliation, that's not competition — it's coercion. Uber will continue to stand up for merchants and for a level playing field. We look forward to presenting the facts in court." Uber requested a jury trial in its original complaint. The company has not specified the amount of damages it is seeking. Separately, Deliveroo confirmed Friday that DoorDash offered to buy the European food delivery company for $3.6 billion.
Yahoo
25-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Uber accused DoorDash of stifling competition. DoorDash says merchants just like them more.
DoorDash asked the California Superior Court to dismiss Uber's lawsuit on Friday. In February, Uber accused DoorDash of inflating costs and other anti-competitive business practices. "Instead of competing through innovation, Uber has resorted to litigation," DoorDash says. DoorDash wants Uber's anti-competition lawsuit tossed by the California Superior Court, saying the litigation is a "cynical and calculated scare tactic." DoorDash filed the motion alongside a press release on Friday. "It's disappointing behavior from a company once known for competing on the merits of its products and innovation," DoorDash, which tops the online food delivery market in the United States, wrote in the release. Uber filed a complaint against DoorDash in February, accusing the company of anti-competitive business practices that inflated prices for restaurants and customers. The complaint said DoorDash "devised and is engaged in an unlawful scheme to stifle competition with Uber Eats, its closest rival." Uber accused DoorDash in the complaint of leveraging restaurants' dependence on its app to secure near-exclusive or exclusive use. "Restaurants simply cannot afford to stand up to DoorDash, and find themselves powerless to choose the service or services that are best for their businesses in the market for first-party delivery," Uber's complaint said. Earnest Analytics reported in February that DoorDash dominated the food delivery market with a 60.7% share. Uber Eats followed at 26.1% and Grubhub at 6.3%. DoorDash denied Uber's accusations in the motion on Friday. Among its arguments, DoorDash said Uber is trying to "shoehorn its competition claims" by using a statute that typically applies to "disputes regarding employee non-compete provisions." "Uber's lawsuit should be seen for what it is: sour grapes from a competitor that has been told by merchants, time and again, that they prefer working with DoorDash," the company's motion said. That's not the basis for a lawsuit — it's just fair competition. The Court should sustain DoorDash's demurrer." Uber told Business Insider in a statement that it won't back down. "It seems like the team at DoorDash is having a hard time understanding the content of our complaint. When restaurants are forced to choose between unfair terms or retaliation, that's not competition — it's coercion. Uber will continue to stand up for merchants and for a level playing field. We look forward to presenting the facts in court," an Uber spokesperson said. A lawyer for DoorDash told BI, "Uber appears to be upset that they're losing in the marketplace because DoorDash has better and more innovative products, but that isn't a legitimate basis for a lawsuit." "Uber's legal claims are meritless and should be dismissed," the lawyer said. DoorDash isn't Uber's only legal battle this year. In April, the Federal Trade Commission sued Uber, saying the company added users to its Uber One subscription program without their consent. The FTC said in a press release that the company "failed to deliver promised savings" and made it tough for users to cancel the service. Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi told Semafor on Friday that the FTC's lawsuit was a "head-scratcher." "We make it incredibly easy to sign up for Uber One, the value is enormous, the renewal rates are over 90%. It's a great product," Khosrowshahi said. "We allow you to cancel. We allow you to pause. That one was a head-scratcher for me." Read the original article on Business Insider
Gulf Insider
17-03-2025
- Health
- Gulf Insider
Man With 'Disfigured Genitals' Gets $50 Million In Starbucks Spill Suit
A man whose genitalia was 'disfigured' by hot coffee was awarded $50 million by a California jury on Friday after a five year court Garcia was picking up drinks at a Los Angeles Starbucks drive-through when he suffered 'suffered severe burns, disfigurement, and debilitating nerve damage to his genitals when hot drinks ultimately spilled' onto his lap, according to the 2020 lawsuit filed in California Superior Court, which accused Starbucks of breaching its duty of care by failing to secure the lid. Garcia's lawyer, Michael Parker, said his client was picking up three beverages – one of which wasn't fully pushed into the drink holder. When the barista handed Garcia the order, a hot drink fell out and spilled onto his lap – causing permanent and life-changing disfigurement. According to a recording of the verdict, Garcia's damages cover physical pain, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation, inconvenience, grief, disfigurement, physical impairment, anxiety and emotional distress. Garcia underwent skin grafts and other procedures on his genitals after a venti-sized tea drink spilled on him on Feb. 8, 2020, causing 'permanent and life-changing disfigurement,' according to his attorneys. Click here to read more Also read: US & Israel Ask East African Countries To Resettle Palestinians
