Nuked 
Hello, tech enthusiasts! Let’s dive into a rather intriguing legal battle brewing in the tech world.
A collective of law professors with a focus on copyright issues have recently submitted an amicus brief in favor of authors who are taking on Meta. Their claim? That Meta allegedly trained its Llama AI models using e-books without the necessary permissions.
In this amicus brief, which found its way to the U.S. District Court for California, the professors pointed out that Meta’s fair use argument is a hefty request, asking for more rights than what has ever been granted to human authors.
According to the brief, training generative models on copyrighted works isn’t ‘transformative’. It emphasized that this use is pretty similar to how human authors traditionally use these works – to educate themselves!
The professors further contend that such training aims to produce new works that directly compete with the original books – effectively monetarily benefiting a profit-driven company like Meta.
This case, known as Kadrey v. Meta, features notable authors like Richard Kadrey and Sarah Silverman who assert that their intellectual property rights were violated when Meta used their e-books to develop these models.
Interestingly, Meta has countered that its actions are indeed fair use and argues that the case should be tossed out due to the authors supposedly lacking the standing to sue.
Recently, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria allowed the lawsuit to proceed despite dismissing parts of it. His judgment acknowledged that the copyright infringement claims indicate a tangible injury, thus granting the authors the standing they need.
This legal tussle is part of a broader landscape where various AI copyright lawsuits are currently under review, including a case involving The New York Times taking on OpenAI.
