Book authors made the wrong arguments in Meta AI training case, judge says
Soon after a landmark ruling deemed that when Anthropic copied books to train artificial intelligence models, it was a “transformative” fair use, another judge has arrived at the same conclusion in a case pitting book authors against Meta.
But that doesn’t necessarily mean the judges are completely in agreement, and that could soon become a problem for not just Meta, but other big AI companies celebrating the pair of wins this week.
On Wednesday, Judge Vince Chhabria explained that he sided with Meta, despite his better judgment, mainly because the authors made all the wrong arguments in their case against Meta.
Related stories
Related Knowledge Center: Artificial intelligence
On top of a failing business model, newsrooms must navigate the powerful — and not fully reliable — new capabilities of artificial intelligence and the deployment of large language models.
State of the business model | Copyright and intellectual property
Related Knowledge Center: Copyright and intellectual property
With copyright questions already complicated by the emergence of the web in the 1990s, artificial intelligence raised the stakes to a new level.