A recent court case has put the spotlight on how tech giants use books to train their AI models. A group of authors, including Sarah Silverman, sued Meta, claiming the company used their books without permission. But a federal judge ruled in Meta's favor, saying the company's use of the books was "fair use" under copyright law.

This isn't the first time a tech company has won a case like this. Just days before, another judge ruled in favor of Anthropic in a similar lawsuit. These victories are seen as wins for the tech industry, which has been fighting with media companies for years over the use of copyrighted material to train AI models.

But don't think these rulings mean all AI training on copyrighted works is now legal. The judge made it clear that this decision was specific to this case. He said that in the future, authors might win if they can show that AI models are hurting their book sales.

The judge also said that Meta's use of the books was "transformative, " meaning the AI models didn't just copy the books. The authors couldn't prove that Meta's actions hurt their book sales, which is a key factor in copyright law.

Other lawsuits are still ongoing. For example, The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for using news articles to train AI models. Disney and Universal are suing Midjourney for using films and TV shows. The judge in the Meta case said that some industries, like news articles, might have stronger arguments for fair use.

So, what does this all mean? It's a reminder that the law is still catching up to technology. And it's a sign that the battle over who owns the future of AI is far from over.

AI and Books: A Legal Showdown

Actions