The judge says Meta’s AI copyright case is about “Next Taylor Swift.”
Meta The fight for copyright Along with a group of authors, including Sarah Silverman and Ta-Nehisi Coates, we will turn on the question of whether the company’s AI tools produce works that can eat up the author’s book sales.
US District Judge Vince Chhabria spent several hours burning attorneys from both sides after each filed their claims for partial summary judgment. In other words, they want each to dominate the specific issue of the case rather than being decided in court. The authors argue that Meta used his work to build generative AI tools, highlighting the company’s pirated book through “Shadow Libraries” like Libgen. The social media giant has not denied that it used or used it I downloaded the book from Shadow Libraries It’s a lot, but I’ll make a point Its behavior is shielded The “fair use” doctrine contains exceptions to US copyright law that allow for unauthorized use of copyrighted work in certain cases, such as parody, education, and news reports.
If Chhabria grants either move, he may issue a ruling before proceeding to trial, and perhaps set a significant precedent that will shape how the court advances the case of generated AI copyright. Kadreyv. Meta It’s one of Dozens of lawsuits It was raised against AI companies that are involved in the US legal system.
The author focused on the copyright infringement elements of the case, but Chhabria spoke with emphasis on his belief that Meta’s AI tools would hurt the sale of books or whether the author would otherwise lose money. “If you’re changing dramatically, you might even say that you’ll erase the market for that person’s work, and you’re probably saying that you don’t even have to pay a license to use their work to use their work to create products that destroy their work – I don’t understand how it can serve fair” (Shanmugam responded that the proposed effect was “just speculation.”)
Chhabria and Shanmugam discussed whether Taylor Swift would be harmed if her music was fed into AI tools and created billions of robot imitations. Chhabria questioned how this would affect less established songwriters. “What about the next Taylor Swift?” he asked, claiming that “relatively unknown artists” whose work was consumed by Meta would likely hinder his career if the model produced “a billion pop songs” in style.
Sometimes it sounded like the author would lose, but Chebria stated that Meta is “destined to fail” if she could prove that Meta’s tools had created similar works that cratered how much money she could make from her job. However, Chhabria also emphasized that she was not convinced that the authors could provide the necessary evidence. When turning to the author’s legal team led by well-known lawyer David Boys, Chhabria repeatedly asked whether plaintiffs could actually demonstrate accusations that Meta’s AI tools are likely to undermine commercial outlook. “It appears they are asking them to speculate that the market for Sara Silverman’s memoirs will be affected,” he told Boys. “It’s not clear to me that it’s true.”