legal-technology7.365 min read
"AI's Impact on Patent Practice and Intellectual Property Protection"
1 year ago•Source: Patently-O
Legal Technology News
The latest legal technology stories, summarized by AI
Featured Legal Technology Stories
View original source
2.05 min•1 year ago
"Judge Dismisses Elon Musk's Hate-Speech Lawsuit Against Anti-Hate Group"
A US judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk's X against the Center for Countering Digital Hate, stating that the case was an attempt to silence critics and punish them for their speech. The lawsuit alleged that the nonprofit violated X's terms of service by gathering data that documented an increase in hate speech on the platform following Musk's takeover. The judge's decision emphasized the importance of free speech and criticized X for attempting to avoid addressing the fundamental issue by seeking damages based on reputational harm. The Center for Countering Digital Hate hailed the ruling as a victory for public-interest researchers holding social media companies accountable for hosting hate and disinformation.
More Top Stories
2
"Judge Dismisses Elon Musk's Lawsuit Against Anti-Hate Speech Group"
New York Post •1 year ago
3
More Legal Technology Stories
"Judge Dismisses Elon Musk's Defamation Lawsuit Against Hate Speech Watchdog Group"
A judge in California dismissed Elon Musk's lawsuit against the Center for Countering Digital Hate, citing the state's anti-Slapp law and stating that the case was about punishing the defendants for their speech. Musk's lawsuit alleged that the organization unlawfully accessed data to make reports on hate speech on X, formerly Twitter, which Musk acquired. The ruling was celebrated by CCDH, with its CEO hoping it would embolden other researchers to hold social media companies accountable. Musk's efforts to sue groups monitoring hate speech have raised concerns about his attempts to leverage his wealth to silence critics.
"Social Media Giants to Face Lawsuit Over Buffalo Shooter Radicalization"
A New York state judge has ruled that Reddit and YouTube must face a lawsuit alleging that their algorithms played a role in radicalizing the shooter responsible for a racist shooting in Buffalo. The lawsuit, filed by survivors of the shooting, challenges the limits of Section 230, a law that shields internet platforms from lawsuits over user-posted content. The decision allows the claims against the tech companies to proceed to the discovery stage, while Reddit and YouTube have expressed disagreement with the ruling and plan to appeal.
"Social Media Giants to Face Lawsuits Over Alleged Role in Buffalo Mass Shooting"
Reddit and YouTube have been ordered by a New York state judge to face lawsuits seeking to hold them responsible for enabling a white supremacist who killed 10 Black people in a 2022 Buffalo, New York grocery store shooting. The 25 plaintiffs, including store employees and customers, allege that the platforms were designed to addict and radicalize users, leading to the shooter's racially motivated mass shooting. Reddit and YouTube argued they were not liable under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, but the judge allowed the plaintiffs to pursue negligence-based claims, citing the mental distress suffered by witnesses. The lawsuits were filed by the gun control advocacy group Everytown Law and seek civil damages.
"Judge Allows Lawsuits Against YouTube, Facebook, and Reddit for Alleged Role in Mass Shooting Radicalization"
A New York state judge has ruled that lawsuits against social media companies, including Meta, Alphabet, Reddit, and 4chan, can proceed, alleging that the platforms contributed to the radicalization of a gunman who killed 10 people at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York in 2022. The judge denied a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, stating that the complaint sufficiently pleads viable causes of action to go forward at this stage of the litigation. The social media companies named in the lawsuit had filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that they are akin to message boards containing third-party content, but the judge ruled that it is too early to dismiss the actions or inaction of the social media/internet defendants through their platforms as a matter of law. YouTube and Reddit have expressed disagreement with the decision and plan to appeal, while also emphasizing their efforts to identify and remove extremist content from their platforms.
"Elon Musk's X Faces Uphill Battle in Lawsuit Against Hate Speech Researchers"
A federal judge in San Francisco appears skeptical of a lawsuit brought by Elon Musk's X against a nonprofit that found the platform allowed hate speech to spread. The judge questioned the validity of the case, expressing doubts about the breach of contract claim and suggesting that X could have pursued a defamation suit instead. The nonprofit, Center for Countering Digital Hate, argued that the lawsuit is an attempt by Musk to silence criticism and cited California's anti-SLAPP laws. The legal battle stems from reports highlighting hate speech on X, which led to an exodus of advertisers and Musk's controversial response.
"Texas Attorney General Takes Legal Action Against Pornhub Over Age Verification"
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has sued Pornhub's parent company, Aylo, for failing to implement "reasonable age verification methods" on its adult sites, seeking millions of dollars in damages under a state law. The law, HB 1181, requires pornographic sites to use age verification methods and display sexual materials health warnings. Aylo, facing mounting regulatory battles, declined to comment on the lawsuit, which demands fines of $10,000 per day for violations and a lump sum of up to $1.6 million.
"Supreme Court to Rule on Free Speech Challenges to State Social Media Laws"
The Supreme Court is considering the constitutionality of Republican-backed laws in Florida and Texas that aim to restrict social media companies' ability to moderate content, claiming bias against conservative speech. Tech companies argue that the laws infringe on their free speech rights, while the states seek to equate social media platforms with common carriers like the telecommunications industry. The cases have political implications, with President Biden's administration opposing the laws and former President Trump supporting them. The Court previously intervened to prevent the Texas law from taking effect, and the legal challenges raise broader questions about free speech and content moderation on social media platforms.
"Judge Partially Dismisses Authors' Copyright Claims Against OpenAI"
A federal judge has dismissed most of the lawsuit brought by Sarah Silverman, Ta-Nehisi Coates, and other authors against OpenAI over the use of copyrighted books to train its AI chatbot, rejecting claims for vicarious copyright infringement, negligence, and unjust enrichment. The court allowed a claim for unfair competition to proceed, suggesting that OpenAI's use of copyrighted works to train its AI model for profit may constitute an unfair business practice. The ruling questions whether AI firms are required to license the material they use and could impact the future of AI technology.
"OpenAI Prevails in Partial Dismissal of Sarah Silverman's Copyright Lawsuit"
Sarah Silverman's lawsuit against OpenAI will proceed with some claims dismissed, including negligence, unjust enrichment, DMCA violations, and accusations of vicarious infringement. The unfair competition portion of the lawsuit will proceed, alleging that OpenAI directly infringed on copyrighted material by training AI models on her work without permission. The judge suggested that the federal Copyright Act may preempt the remaining claims, and OpenAI admitted that it would be "impossible to train today's leading AI models without using copyrighted materials." Other groups, including The New York Times and The Author’s Guild, are also suing OpenAI for alleged copyright-related violations.
"Authors' Copyright Infringement Claims Against OpenAI Partially Dismissed"
A California court has partially dismissed a copyright case against OpenAI brought by authors, including Sarah Silverman, alleging that OpenAI’s ChatGPT is pirating their work. The court ruled to dismiss claims on vicarious copyright infringement, DMCA violations, negligence, and unjust enrichment, but upheld the unfair competition claim. The main complaint of direct copyright infringement remains, and the authors have until March 13th to file changes to their original complaint. OpenAI is facing multiple copyright infringement lawsuits from authors, including a proposed class action lawsuit and a lawsuit from The New York Times.