In the case of Thompson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence, Judge Stephanos Bibas ruled that Ross's use of Thompson Reuters' law summaries constituted copyright infringement and did not qualify for fair use. The ruling clarified that the original and creative nature of the headnotes made them copyrightable, despite being derived from judicial opinions. This decision overruled his previous stance that these matters should be decided by a jury. It underscores the protective boundary around legal research tools and highlights concerns about AI's reliance on existing copyrighted materials.
A smart man knows when he is right; a wise man knows when he is wrong.
Even a headnote taken verbatim from an opinion is a carefully chosen fraction of the whole...expresses the editor's idea about what the important point of law from the opinion is.
Collection
[
|
...
]