The AI company’s motions to dismiss the two nearly identical suits argued their claim that every ChatGPT output is an act of vicarious copyright infringement is an “erroneous legal conclusion.”
The motions, both of which were filed Monday, notably didn’t ask the US District Court for the Northern District of California to toss out the plaintiffs’ claim of direct copyright infringement on ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.
