Law Professors Back Authors Suing Meta Over AI Copyright Infringement: What It Means for AI and Fair Use
Meta’s legal battle over its Llama AI models just got more intense—and I’ve been following every twist closely. A group of top copyright law professors has stepped into the ring, siding with authors like Richard Kadrey, Sarah Silverman, and Ta-Nehisi Coates, who allege their e-books were used without consent to train Meta’s generative AI models. As someone who tracks the AI industry daily, I see this case as a landmark moment in the fight over AI, copyright, and creator rights.
Legal Experts Say Meta's Fair Use Argument Overreaches
In a new amicus brief filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, a coalition of copyright law professors argued that Meta’s defense hinges on an “unprecedented” interpretation of fair use.
They wrote that training AI on copyrighted works is not “transformative,” especially when the goal is to create new content that competes in the same market. According to them, this is a commercial use that cannot be excused under existing fair use laws.
Let me break that down: “Transformative” use typically means a work is used in a way that adds new expression or meaning. But if Meta is using books to teach its AI how to mimic human writing and then generate similar outputs, the professors believe it’s more exploitation than transformation.
Copyright Advocates Rally Behind Authors
The professors aren’t alone. Multiple copyright-heavyweight organizations have thrown their support behind the authors. These include:
-
International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers
-
Copyright Alliance
-
Association of American Publishers
These groups believe the stakes go beyond this one lawsuit. They’re arguing that if courts allow AI companies to freely scrape copyrighted material, it could undermine the entire copyright system. As someone who deeply respects creative work, I see why they’re pushing back.
Meta Responds With Its Own Legal Allies
Shortly after the brief went public, Meta pointed to its own set of amicus briefs. These were filed earlier by a smaller group of law professors and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), who support Meta’s interpretation of fair use.
Meta is also leaning on a procedural defense—claiming the authors lack standing to sue because their works weren’t directly harmed. But that argument is starting to crack.
Judge Allows Copyright Infringement Claims to Proceed
Earlier this month, Judge Vince Chhabria allowed the core copyright infringement claims to move forward, stating that the plaintiffs presented a “concrete injury.” He also noted that Meta allegedly removed copyright management information (CMI), which could point to deliberate infringement.
Let me highlight this: when a judge says your injury is “concrete,” it means the court sees real harm—not just a theoretical one. That’s a big deal in IP law, especially in cases involving AI.
Why This Matters for AI, Creators, and Fair Use
The Kadrey v. Meta case isn’t the only one making headlines. We’re also seeing legal pressure from The New York Times vs. OpenAI, another massive lawsuit involving AI and copyright.
As a tech writer who’s covered AI’s evolution for years, I believe these cases will shape the boundaries of how AI companies source and use training data.
If courts ultimately side with authors, tech giants could be forced to license data—or face tighter regulations. On the flip side, if companies like Meta win, we might see a floodgate of unchecked AI training using publicly available but copyrighted content.
My Take on the Future of AI and Copyright
Whether you’re a creator, lawyer, or developer, this case is a must-watch. It puts a spotlight on how emerging AI tools are built—and who pays the price.
AI models don’t learn in a vacuum. They rely on the blood, sweat, and tears of creators who produce the texts, images, and videos that feed the algorithms. If those creators don’t have a say, we’re entering dangerous territory.
And while Meta argues for innovation, that innovation shouldn’t come at the cost of eroding copyright protections that have stood for centuries.
The Line Between Innovation and Infringement
As the AI industry explodes, I’ll be keeping a close eye on how courts handle these pivotal lawsuits. It’s not just about Llama or Meta. It’s about setting the rules for how all future AI tools get built—and whether creators will have a voice in that process.
If you're in tech, law, publishing, or just a curious AI enthusiast, make sure to follow this case. It’s one of those legal battles that could ripple across the entire digital landscape.
Post a Comment