Two judges in the identical federal courthouse in San Francisco final week issued main rulings on whether or not coaching giant language fashions on copyrighted books constitutes truthful use, however their selections underscore key authorized and strategic variations that would form the way forward for generative AI litigation.
Trending
- Don’t throw away those eggshells, use them to sharpen your scissors at home | Lifestyle News
- Want to know Malaika Arora’s secret to glowing skin? She starts her day with this ‘retinol juice’ | Lifestyle News
- 7 ways men in their 20s can boost their testosterone levels | Health News
- Lakme Fashion Week 2025 highlights: Mrunal Thakur stuns in gold, Tabu exudes bridal grace, Vaani Kapoor turns muse | Fashion News
- Vitamin B3 supplement may reduce your risk of skin cancer | Health News
- ‘My dream for mental health in India is what Gully cricket is to India’: Deepika Padukone details the initial struggles of advocating for mental health | Feelings News
- Not all headaches are bad — here’s when they become a red flag | Health News
- ‘Just had a birthday. Don’t love the number, but…’: How 61-year-old F.R.I.E.N.D.S star Courteney Cox is ageing so gracefully | Fitness News
Sunday, October 12
AI Copyright Showdown: How Judges Diverged in ‘Kadrey v. Meta’ and ‘Bartz v. Anthropic’
