Author Christopher Farnsworth Sues Meta Over Copyright Infringement (06.10.24)

Authored by: Ms Tanima Bhatia

Key Highlights

Christopher Farnsworth’s Lawsuit Against Meta: Author Christopher Farnsworth has filed a class-action lawsuit against Meta, accusing the company of using pirated copies of his books, along with others, to train its Llama AI model without permission. The lawsuit claims Meta downloaded and reproduced copyrighted material from the “Books3” collection, bypassing the need to purchase or license the works.
Meta’s Fair Use Defense: Meta, like other tech companies, defends its actions by citing the “fair use” doctrine, arguing that using large datasets to train AI models is transformative and essential for innovation. The company contends that restricting access to such data could hinder the growth of the AI industry.
Impact on Copyright and Licensing: Farnsworth’s legal team argues that Meta’s use of the pirated books harms the emerging market for licensing copyrighted content for AI training. This case is part of a broader wave of lawsuits challenging the unauthorized use of creative works in AI development, raising questions about copyright law in the AI age.

In a major development within the world of artificial intelligence and copyright law, novelist Christopher Farnsworth, best known for his “Nathaniel Cade” fiction series, has filed a class-action lawsuit against Meta, alleging that the tech giant used pirated copies of his books to train its AI language model, Llama. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, claims that Meta unlawfully downloaded and reproduced copyrighted books from a collection known as “Books3,” a trove of pirated material used for AI training purposes.

The Lawsuit’s Allegations

Farnsworth’s lawsuit paints an unfavorable picture of Meta’s practices, accusing the company of building its Llama model using thousands of pirated books, without permission from the authors. One of the critical claims made by Farnsworth’s legal team was that Meta had admitted to using these books in a research paper from February 2023, which stated that Llama’s training data came from two main sources: “the Gutenberg Project,” containing public domain works, and “Books3,” a section of “The Pile,” a dataset often used for training large language models (LLMs).

Farnsworth’s attorneys argue that instead of using pirated material, Meta could have lawfully purchased copies of the books and negotiated proper licenses. The lawsuit states: “Meta could have lawfully purchased copies of books then negotiated a license to reproduce them. Alas, Meta did not even bother to pay the purchase price for the books it illegally downloaded, let alone obtain a license for their reproduction.”

This lawsuit adds to a growing trend of legal battles between tech companies and copyright owners, as authors, musicians, and artists fight back against the unauthorized use of their creative work in AI training. Farnsworth’s case follows in the footsteps of similar lawsuits, including those brought by comedian Sarah Silverman, author Ta-Nehisi Coates, and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, all of whom have accused Meta of using their works without permission.

Meta’s Perspective: Fair Use Defense

On the other hand, Meta and other AI companies have largely defended their practices by invoking the doctrine of “fair use,” a legal principle that allows for limited use of copyrighted material without permission under specific conditions, such as for educational purposes or transformative works. Meta, like other tech giants, claims that training AI models falls under fair use since it requires vast amounts of data to build models capable of simulating human language. By using large datasets, Meta argues, the AI’s purpose transform the data, which could potentially provide a defense.

In response to earlier lawsuits, companies like Meta have argued that such claims against them risk stifling innovation in the rapidly evolving AI industry. The companies argue that without access to broad datasets, developing high-quality AI models that are useful across a wide range of industries would be impossible. As Farnsworth’s lawsuit makes its way through the courts, Meta will likely rely on this defense, continuing to claim that its AI training practices are not infringing on copyright in a way that harms authors.

The Impact on the Market

Farnsworth’s legal team further argues that Meta’s actions have harmed the emerging market for licensing copyrighted materials to AI companies. As AI has grown more prevalent, a market has developed where companies can pay to use high-quality copyrighted content for training AI models. Farnsworth’s lawsuit states that Meta has undermined this market, depriving authors of potential income through book sales and licensing revenue. “Meta chose to use Plaintiff’s works, and the works owned by the proposed Class, free of charge, and in doing so has harmed the market for the copyrighted works,” the lawsuit asserts.

The Road Ahead: A Legal Precedent in the Making?

The Farnsworth v. Meta case could set a crucial legal precedent in the AI industry. As AI continues to revolutionize various fields, from chatbots to content generation, the question of whether using copyrighted material to train these systems falls under fair use remains unanswered by the courts. Mike Palmisciano, an intellectual property expert, weighed in on the issue, stating: “I think the fair-use argument that’s being made in the defense is hard to square with decades of case law on copyright fair use.”

Palmisciano predicts that until the U.S. Supreme Court addresses the matter, companies will likely continue reaching costly settlements with authors and artists whose works were used without permission. He notes that AI companies like Meta and OpenAI have already spent considerable sums on securing licensing agreements to avoid future litigation.

Conclusion: A Battle for Creators’ Rights in the Age of AI

As the lawsuit progresses, it highlights the tension between the rights of creators and the push for innovation in AI. Christopher Farnsworth’s case covers the critical question of whether AI development should be constrained by copyright law or if a new legal framework is needed to accommodate the growing role of AI in everyday life. As more authors and artists take legal action, the courts will be called upon to balance the rights of creators with the needs of an increasingly AI-driven world.