Intellectual Property Law in AI Development: Are there Consequences?
Guest post by Maria Stevens, Intern
This article explores intellectual property law, focusing on Meta Platforms' (Meta) alleged copyright infringement of the development of its Llama Artificial Intelligence (AI) model. The convergence of AI development and intellectual property law is at the forefront of a lawsuit that notable authors, including Sarah Silverman and Michael Chabon, have filed against Meta, alleging Meta utilized their works without permission. This has led to a comprehensive analysis of the legal consequences, intellectual property protection, industry standards, and whether the dynamic field of AI development should be regulated.
What is intellectual property law? Intellectual property protects and enforces copyright, trademarks, patents, and trade secrets.
Additionally, this article will discuss the possibilities of the concerns over copyrighted works, including discussions on the fair use doctrine, and the potential legal fallout for AI companies.
Copyright Infringement Lawsuit
Meta is the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, and it is currently in the middle of a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by notable authors. Two of the authors are comedian Sarah Silverman and Pulitzer Prize winner Michael Chabon. The authors allege that Meta used their copyrighted works without proper authorization, which is the main point of contention in the legal fight.
There are three elements that form the basis for copyright.
- Creativity- The U.S. Supreme Court has said that a work only needs a "modicum" of creativity for it to be creative enough for copyright.
- Originality- work independently created.
- Fixation- A work is fixed when it is embodied in a material object from which it can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for more than a transitory period.
Copyright infringement is reproducing, modifying, distributing, displaying, or performing the protected work during the copyright term.
Legal Consequences
The potential legal consequences for Meta are substantial if found guilty of copyright infringement. If they lose the lawsuit, Meta could be forced to pay fines and damages, which would set an important precedent. Other tech companies would then have to follow the precedent and make it a point to prioritize getting proper permissions and licenses for the use of copyrighted works. The lawsuit emphasizes the importance of legal accountability in the AI industry.
Intellectual Property Protection
At the center of copyright infringement lawsuits is the preservation of intellectual property rights. Authors and content creators maintain the right to control how their works are used, making legal action a crucial means to protect these rights. There is an intricate balance between innovation and the safeguarding of intellectual property.
Industry Standards
The outcome of Meta's lawsuit could contribute to the establishment of industry standards governing the use of copyrighted materials in AI model training. A favorable ruling for content creators may influence the practices of other companies, fostering the adoption of ethical and legal approaches to data acquisition in the AI sector.
There are many public and private organizations that are involved in the political, legislative, and judicial process related to copyright law and policy. Some of the main organizations include the U.S. Copyright Office, Association of American Publishers (AAP), and the American Bar Association.
Some argue that governments should be more involved in the research, development, and regulation of issues surrounding AI. On October 30, 2023, the White House released an Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence.
Chat Logs
The lawsuit against Meta includes chat logs. Allegedly, Meta's legal department had reservations about Meta using books with active copyrights for training AI models, but Meta went forward anyway, against the advice of their counsel. Allegedly, there are Discord chat logs that have been leaked that show the discussions about the legal team’s reservations.
Fair Use Doctrine
The discussion about whether it’s legal to use works with active copyrights leads to the fair use doctrine. Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances. The fair use doctrine could potentially be applied in Meta's case, prompting consideration of whether Meta’s use of the materials falls under the doctrine.
There are four factors to consider when evaluating fair use:
- Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
- Nature of the copyrighted work;
- Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
- Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Innovation Consequences
Legal battles and financial penalties arising from copyright infringement lawsuits may take resources away from innovative and creative endeavors. AI companies facing legal consequences may need to allocate resources to address legal challenges, potentially impeding research and development efforts. Therefore, is it worth it to take the risk of using a copyrighted work? Likewise, if AI companies have unfettered ability to use copyrighted works under fair use, this may have a chilling effect on creators’ creative endeavors.
As intellectual property collides with AI development, Meta's copyright infringement lawsuit serves as a pivotal case study. There is an intricate relationship between legal accountability, intellectual property protection, and the evolving dynamics of AI innovation. In the words of John Wooden, "If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?"—a poignant reminder of the importance of navigating the complexities of intellectual property law in the pursuit of responsible AI development.
Take the Next Step
Explore how to protect your innovations with expert legal guidance. Contact BCR Firm today to schedule your complimentary 15-minute introductory call and take the next step towards securing your intellectual property rights.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, ALL ARTICLES
FEBRUARY 12, 2024
Artificial Intelligence and the Copyright Process
Home | About | Services | Contact | Privacy
130 S. Cameron St., 2nd Floor
Winchester, Virginia 22601
11 North Central Ave.
Staunton, Virginia 24401
Mr. Rothermel is a Registered Patent Attorney, licensed in Virginia & New York
Copyright 2024 | Benjamin C. Rothermel, Esq.
Subscribe to Newsletter
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation, and I invite you to contact me. Contacting me does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to me until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. SOME SECTIONS OF THIS WEBSITE MAY DESCRIBE LEGAL MATTERS HANDLED IN THE PAST BY BENJAMIN C. ROTHERMEL, ESQ. THE RESULTS FOR THESE MATTERS DEPENDED UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO THEIR SITUATIONS. THEY DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE MATTER. Read full disclosure here.
Share On: