top of page

Judge Dismisses Key Claims in Authors vs. OpenAI Copyright Lawsuit.

In the "Authors vs. OpenAI Copyright Lawsuit," a federal court has dismissed the majority of claims brought by notable writers such as Sarah Silverman and Ta-Nehisi Coates, who accused OpenAI of utilizing copyrighted works to train its AI chatbot. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin on February 12, represents a pivotal development in the legal disputes surrounding AI developers' use of copyrighted content.

Authors vs. OpenAI Copyright Lawsuit. Illustration. Created with DALL-E.
Authors vs. OpenAI Copyright Lawsuit. Illustration. Created with DALL-E.

Judge Martinez-Olguin ruled against allowing the lawsuit to proceed on grounds of vicarious copyright infringement, negligence, and unjust enrichment against OpenAI, led by Sam Altman. This follows a similar decision made in a case against Meta, where it was determined that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that ChatGPT's responses were directly derived from their copyrighted works.

The court noted the plaintiffs' failure to identify any specific instance where the AI's output mirrored their copyrighted books. However, they were granted permission to amend their lawsuit, offering a potential for the case to be refiled. The lawsuit did find traction on one point, with the court allowing a claim under California’s unfair competition law to move forward, suggesting OpenAI’s training methods could constitute unfair business practices.

This ruling aligns with previous judicial skepticism around the claims that AI-generated content infringes on copyrighted material without clear evidence of substantial similarity. In another related legal battle, U.S. District Judge William Orrick critiqued similar allegations as lacking sufficient detail.

The outcomes of these lawsuits could set precedents for how AI companies are required to handle copyrighted content used in training their models, potentially impacting the development and application of AI technology. One key debate centers around the necessity for authors to prove that AI outputs closely resemble their original works to establish copyright infringement.

In her ruling, Judge Martinez-Olguin sided with OpenAI, dismissing the vicarious copyright infringement claim on the grounds that there was no proof ChatGPT's answers directly copied or closely mimicked the copyrighted books. She emphasized the need for evidence showing substantial similarity between the AI-generated content and the copyrighted materials.

Furthermore, the court declined to advance a claim related to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, finding no evidence that OpenAI intentionally removed copyright information during its training process to hide potential infringements.

This legal development underscores the complex challenges at the intersection of AI technology and copyright law, spotlighting the need for clear guidelines on the use of copyrighted material in AI training.

6 views0 comments
bottom of page