The decision mirrors one that dismissed some key claims from a similar lawsuit brought against Meta and its AI tools
A set of The authors, including Sarah Silverman and Ta-Nehisi Coates, faced an arguably expected backlash in a copyright infringement case against OpenAI. On Monday, February 12, a federal judge dismissed some but not all of the claims in the lawsuit that OpenAI's ChatGPT program was trained on copyrighted books.
The ruling mirrors a ruling in a separate case brought by some of the same author's plaintiffs (including Silverman) against Meta over the way it trains its AI language models. Like Meta, OpenAI had asked a judge to dismiss some of the authors' broader claims about the company's liability, and was largely successful in that endeavor.
The big claim the judge threw out was the superseding claim of copyright infringement, which essentially argued that any response produced by ChatGPT should be considered infringing because the language model was allegedly trained on unlicensed material. The judge called that claim “inadequate,” saying the plaintiffs “fail to explain what the results entail or claim that any particular product is substantially similar — or at all similar — to their books.”
Additionally, the judge said there was no evidence to support the authors' claim that OpenAI violated the Digital Age Copyright Act by removing relevant copyright information from the material it trained its model on as a way to hide the alleged infringement. . And claims of negligence and unjust enrichment were thrown out as well.
However, the lawsuit has some teeth. The judge refused to dismiss an unfair competition claim rooted in the core claim that OpenAI used copyrighted works to train its language models for commercial profit.
Lawyers for OpenAI and the author's plaintiffs did not immediately return calls Rolling rockrequests for comment.
from our partners at https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/sarah-silverman-lawsuit-openai-partially-dismissed-1234967766/
