This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
After many rounds of motions to dismiss, intellectualproperty cases against AI developers are moving into the discovery phase. Just weeks into 2025, we got our first answer, with a court ordering OpenAI to produce a complete training dataset to plaintiffs. Defendants Answer to First Consolidated Amended Complaint, (N.D.
Thats true as advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and the activities of big tech firms raise concerns about intellectualproperty rights and data privacy. Learn about some of the big technology issues that are trending AOPs for 2025, and how these are developing into important practice areas for lawyers.
But this new era of AI has not come without controversy, as authors and rights holders have launched waves of litigation against the companies that trained and released generative AI models, as well as their investors and affiliates, alleging violations of intellectualproperty rights. 1] Proving Defendants Use of Training Data Inputs.
Following a contentious discovery period, defendants in Anthropic moved for summary judgment and asserted a fair use defense on March 27, 2025. Defendants in Meta opposed plaintiffs’ motion and asserted an affirmative fair use defense on March 24, 2025 and filed a cross-motion for summary judgment on March 28, 2025.
Whether the issue involves valuation disputes, lost profits, or allegations of financial fraud, attorneys rely on forensic accountants to provide the objective, analytical firepower needed to build or defend a case. This article addresses the topic of forensic accounting marketing.
On June 27, 2025, Lululemon filed a federal lawsuit accusing Costco of selling “confusingly similar” knockoffs of its best-selling clothes—including its Scuba hoodies, Define jackets, and ABC pants. Lululemon is betting big on protecting its intellectualproperty, but it may have underestimated the power of public sentiment.
With respect to the balance of hardships, the court says “Next Level will not experience meaningful hardship as a result of the TRO because Next Level will only be enjoined from misappropriating Invisible Narratives’ intellectualproperty.” Next Level Apps Technology FZCO , 2025 WL 551866 (N.D. ” PREACH!
Thats true as advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and the activities of big tech firms raise concerns about intellectualproperty rights and data privacy. Learn about some of the big technology issues that are trending AOPs for 2025, and how these are developing into important practice areas for lawyers.
For covered entities deploying AI, relevant personnel should also be trained on : how to secure and defend AI systems from cybersecurity attacks; how to design and develop AI systems securely; and how to draft queries to avoid disclosing NPI (as applicable).
Target customer: Legal professionals: This includes individual attorneys, law firms (from boutique to large multinational firms), in-house legal teams in corporations, and public defenders. We anticipate achieving >$5M in SaaS revenue in 2025$ and over $12M in SaaS revenue in 2026.
This decision largely rejects the defendants’ motion to dismiss, which will induce more plaintiff lawyers to bring more cases. intellectualproperty[] and A.I. First Amendment The way the court explains it, the defendants made an interesting choice in their First Amendment defense. Character A.I.]
Sua sponte, the judge questions joinder: Sua sponte review of the propriety of joinder in Schedule A cases is a regular practice in this district because almost every Schedule A complaint lacks specificity as to why each defendant should be joined. This is, quite literally, a restatement of the cause of action for infringement.
Now, courts will have the benefit of a “pre-publication” version of the Copyright Office’s long-awaited Report on Generative AI Training (the “May 2025 Report”). In the meantime, the May 2025 Report offers the only guidance to date from the Office regarding how it sees the question of fair use in the context of generative AI.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content