Saltar al contenido

Cookies de análisis

Usamos Google Analytics y Google Tag Manager para contar las visitas y ver qué páginas resultan útiles. Si aceptas, Google Analytics puede guardar cookies para reconocer tus visitas posteriores. Si rechazas, no guarda ninguna cookie, pero Google sigue recibiendo una señal sin cookies por cada página que ves. No enviamos a Google tu nombre, tu correo electrónico ni los datos de tu registro, y puedes cambiar tu elección en cualquier momento en «Configuración de cookies», al pie de la página. Privacidad

Esta traducción de la interfaz es un borrador y no la ha revisado una persona nativa. El inglés es la versión de origen. English

Appeals court upholds Thomson Reuters' copyright win over ROSS Intelligence, rejecting fair-use defense for AI training

29 sept 2026 · Recopilado automáticamente de fuentes públicas. No revisado por una persona.

Este contenido solo está disponible en su idioma original (inglés).

What happened

On 29 September 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (No. 25-2153; panel: Judges Restrepo, Montgomery-Reeves and Bove; oral argument held 11 June 2026 in Philadelphia) affirmed Thomson Reuters' copyright victory against Ross Intelligence, rejecting Ross's argument that its search engine made fair use of material from Thomson Reuters' Westlaw platform (Reuters, Blake Brittain, reporting 29 Sept 2026). It is the first ruling by a U.S. appeals court in a copyright dispute over AI training.

Thomson Reuters' 2020 suit (D. Del. No. 1:20-cv-00613, Judge Stephanos Bibas) accused Ross — then a legal-research competitor — of copying thousands of Westlaw's "headnotes" (short summaries of points of law in judicial opinions written by Thomson Reuters editors) to train its competing AI-based legal search engine. After Thomson Reuters refused Ross a license, Ross bought ~25,000 "Bulk Memos" written by lawyers using the Westlaw headnotes and used them as training data. In February 2025 Judge Bibas rejected Ross's fair-use defense, finding the use not transformative: "Ross took the headnotes to make it easier to develop a competing legal research tool." The Third Circuit has now affirmed that rejection. The court's reasoning is currently sealed: the 29 September docket order directs the parties to propose redactions within 10 days before the opinion is released.

Why it may matter to you

This is the first appellate decision on fair use for AI training. Two important limits, both in the reporting: the case concerns a non-generative AI legal search engine trained to compete directly with its source, not a general-purpose generative model — and the reasoning is sealed, so it is unclear yet how the decision will apply to other disputes. Ross shut down its platform in January 2021, citing litigation costs; its antitrust counterclaims against Thomson Reuters were dismissed in September 2024.

What is not yet known

The sealed reasoning — which will clarify how far this ruling reaches beyond a headnote-trained legal-search tool.

Fuentes