Judge Asserts Book Authors Presented Flawed Arguments in Meta AI Training Case

In the Meta case, Judge Chhabria emphasized the importance of “market dilution” in determining copyright infringements, particularly in the context of AI-generated works. He rejected Meta’s claim that market dilution was irrelevant under the fourth fair use factor, asserting that indirect substitution—where an AI-generated novel replaces a human-written one—should still be recognized. Chhabria warned that AI can produce vast amounts of content quickly, potentially undermining creators’ incentives and flooding the market, making the issue of market dilution highly pertinent. He indicated that this technology poses unique challenges not seen before, prompting a possible shift in the copyright landscape. While he acknowledged that the authors involved in the lawsuit against Meta did not robustly argue their case regarding indirect substitution, he hinted that a stronger argument could have led to a different ruling, with market dilution likely favoring plaintiffs in similar future cases.

Source link