Insuring Intellectual Property – Examining AI and Fair Use; The National Law Review, July 29, 2025

 Michael S. Levine, Geoffrey B. Fehling, Armin Ghiam, Madalyn "Mady" Moore of Hunton Andrews Kurth   - Publications, The National Law Review; Insuring Intellectual Property – Examining AI and Fair Use

"The frequency of lawsuits involving the development and deployment of AI technologies is increasing by the day. Recent lawsuits seeking to hold companies directly and secondarily liable for “joint enterprises” based on use (or alleged misuse) of copyrighted works for training AI models serve as important reminders about the protections that intellectual property (IP) insurance can offer to cover the risks associated with copyright infringement claims.

Recently, a California federal district court ruled that it was “fair use” for an AI software company to use copyrighted books to train its large language models (LLMs). However, the court also found the company’s unauthorized possession of over seven million pirated books that it downloaded from the internet (apparently for free) amounted to copyright infringement independent from whether the books were ultimately used to train the LLMs. In contrast, where the company purchased books before scanning them into digital files, the use was a permissible “fair use.”

The court’s order in Bartz et al. v. Anthropic PBC, No. 3:24-cv-05417 (N.D. Cal. June 23, 2025), highlights the nuanced permissible use of copyrighted training data and underscores why policyholders engaged in the use of copyrighted material should acquire and maintain robust IP insurance that will reliably respond to claims of alleged infringement."

Two Courts Rule On Generative AI and Fair Use — One Gets It Right; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), June 26, 2025

TORI NOBLE, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Two Courts Rule On Generative AI and Fair Use — One Gets It Right

 "Gen-AI is spurring the kind of tech panics we’ve seen before; then, as now, thoughtful fair use opinions helped ensure that copyright law served innovation and creativity. Gen-AI does raise a host of other serious concerns about fair labor practices and misinformation, but copyright wasn’t designed to address those problems. Trying to force copyright law to play those roles only hurts important and legal uses of this technology.

In keeping with that tradition, courts deciding fair use in other AI copyright cases should look to Bartz, not Kadrey."

Fair Use or Foul Play? The AI Fair Use Copyright Line; The National Law Review, July 2, 2025

 Jodi Benassi of McDermott Will & Emery  , The National Law Review; Fair Use or Foul Play? The AI Fair Use Copyright Line

"Practice note: This is the first federal court decision analyzing the defense of fair use of copyrighted material to train generative AI. Two days after this decision issued, another Northern District of California judge ruled in Kadrey et al. v. Meta Platforms Inc. et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-03417, and concluded that the AI technology at issue in his case was transformative. However, the basis for his ruling in favor of Meta on the question of fair use was not transformation, but the plaintiffs’ failure “to present meaningful evidence that Meta’s use of their works to create [a generative AI engine] impacted the market” for the books."