Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 504: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law and Motions for New Trial (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 412: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Summary Judgment
What Litigants Need to Know about Summary Judgment
JONES DAY TALKS®: Tiffany v. Costco Raises Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting Questions
Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: Examining FDA’s Enforcement Authority Over Stem Cell Clinics and Compounders
K&L Gates Triage: Avoiding the Risks Associated with Mandatory Vaccination Programs
Until two weeks ago, no U.S. court had ruled on whether training generative AI models on copyrighted works could constitute a fair use, or if the simple act of training such models without a license would constitute copyright...more
The US District Court for the Northern District of California granted summary judgment in favor of an artificial intelligence (AI) company, finding that its use of lawfully acquired copyrighted materials for training and its...more
Kadrey v. Meta! On the merits! A doozy of a summary judgment opinion in form and substance. "The devil is in the details," but even for non-lawyers, at least the first five pages are a must-read - there are almost no legal...more
In separate high-profile actions brought by authors against Anthropic and Meta, two California federal judges ruled that the reproduction of copyright-protected books to train large language models (LLMs) was fair use that...more
On June 23, 2025, Senior Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California issued a highly anticipated summary judgment opinion in Bartz v. Anthropic PBC. This is one of the first decisions of many to come dealing...more
In one of the first substantive decisions analyzing whether the use of copyrighted works to train large language models (LLMs) for generative artificial intelligence (AI) services is infringing or a fair use, Judge William...more
Within a roughly one-week period in late June 2025, two federal judges in the Northern District of California entered summary judgment rulings on the issue of “fair use” in connection with generative AI platforms’ use of...more
In a significant development for the field of artificial intelligence and copyright law, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has issued a ruling in a case brought by a group of authors against AI...more
In the space of forty-eight hours, two judges of the Northern District of California issued detailed, partially contrasting opinions on whether large language model (“LLM”) training that copies entire books without...more
A federal district court in San Francisco ruled that training AI models with copyright-protected works is fair use. On June 23, 2025, Judge William Alsup ruled that Anthropic did not infringe the books of three authors used...more
On June 23, 2025, Judge Alsup in the Northern District of California issued an order in Bartz et al. v. Anthropic PBC, granting in part and denying in part Defendant Anthropic’s motion for summary judgment on the sole issue...more
In one of the most consequential decisions to date involving generative artificial intelligence (genAI) and copyright law, Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that some...more
The first substantive decision on the fair use defense in an artificial intelligence (AI) copyright case came down against the defendant, who used AI to create a competing product. However, as the decision expressly limited...more
On February 11, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware became the first to rule on whether the use of copyrighted materials to train an AI system qualifies as copyright infringement. In Thomson-Reuters...more
Recently, a federal court issued the first ruling on the closely watched issue of fair use in copyright infringement involving AI. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff on its direct infringement claim, and ruled that the...more
Albert Einstein is credited with saying “the measure of intelligence is the ability to change.” In September 2023, Judge Stephanos Bibas—sitting by designation in the District of Delaware—denied plaintiff Thomson Reuters’...more
On Tuesday, February 11, a Delaware district court issued much-awaited summary-judgment decisions in Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH et al v. ROSS Intelligence Inc., No. 1:20-cv-613, potentially shaping how future...more
Thomson Reuters v. ROSS, 1:20-cv-00613-SB, is the first district court case to address fair use and copyright infringement related to training AI models. Judge Bibas granted summary judgment of no fair use upon a balancing of...more
Responding to the OpenAI brief that read more like a press release than a traditional motion to dismiss, the New York Times attacked OpenAI's approach from the very first sentence, calling the factual background of OpenAI's...more
On September 25, 2023, a United States Circuit Judge determined that fact questions surrounding issues of fair use and tortious interference required a jury to decide media conglomerate Thomson Reuters’s lawsuit against Ross...more
In AI Training Case Brought by Thomson Reuters, Court Denies Summary Judgment - In Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence, a district court largely denied the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment and held that a...more
Generative AI has taken the world by storm since OpenAI launched ChatGPT in November 2022. But the buzz and excitement of GAI has come with difficult legal questions that threaten the new technology. Several lawsuits—some of...more
On August 18, 2023, in Thaler v. Perlmutter, Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted the U.S. Copyright Office's motion for summary judgment, affirming the Copyright Office's...more