Law professors side with authors battling Meta in AI copyright case
A group of professors who specialize in copyright legislation has submitted an amicus assignment To support authors who suggest Meta for alleged training of his Lama AI models on e-books without permission.
The assignment, submitted on Friday to the American court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division, mentions Meta’s Fair Use Defense “a breathtaking request for greater legal privileges than courts have ever granted human authors.”
“The use of copyrighted works to train generative models is not ‘transforming’, because the use of works for that goal is not relevant different from its use to teach human authors, which is a head of original purpose of everything [authors’] Works, “reads the assignment.” That training use is also not ‘transformative’ because the aim is to make work possible that compete with the copied works on the same markets-one that, when it is pursued by a company with a profit motive such as Meta, also makes the use flawless ‘commercial.’ “
The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers, The Global Trade Association for Academic and Professional Publishers, has also submitted an amicus assignment To support the authors on Friday. The Copyright Alliance did that tooA non -profit organization that represents artistic makers in a wide range of copyright disciplines, and the Association of American Publishers.
Hours after this piece was published, a meta spokesperson to WAN on Amicus -Letters submitted by a smaller group of law professors and the Electronic Frontier Foundation last week support The Tech Giants legal position.
In the case, Kadrey v. Meta, authors, including Richard Kadrey, Sarah Silverman and Ta-Nehisi Coates, have claimed that Meta has violated their intellectual property rights by using their e-books to train models, and that the company has removed the copyright information from those e-books. In the meantime, Meta has not only claimed that his training is eligible as reasonable use, but that the case must be rejected because the authors are not standing to sue.
Earlier this month, the American district judge Vince Chhabria allowed the case to move forward, although he declined part of it. In his ruling, Chalabria wrote that the statement of copyright infringement “is clearly a concrete injury that is sufficient to stand” and that the authors also “sufficiently claim that Meta deliberately removed CMI [copyright management information] To hide copyright infringement. “
The courts currently weigh a number of AI authentic lawsuits, including the New York Times suit against OpenAi.
Updated 20:36 Pacific: References added to extra Amicus instructions that were submitted on Friday.
