California lawyer Mark Lemley has removed Meta Platforms as a client in a high-profile copyright case, citing CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s “degeneration into toxic masculinity and neo-Nazi insanity.” said the Stanford University professor on LinkedIn.
Attention: In this video, Lemley argues that AI’s use of copyrighted material is not infringement.
Lemley said in a post Monday that he still believes Mehta is “on the right side in the generative AI copyright dispute,” but that he “cannot in good conscience serve as their attorney any longer.” . Mr. Zuckerberg has caused controversy in recent days by halting the social media giant’s diversity efforts and ending fact-checking of his Facebook posts, while preaching the benefits of “masculine energy.”
Following Mr. Lemley’s departure, Cooley Law Firm and attorneys at Cleary Gottlib Steen & Hamilton have filed important lawsuits from authors alleging that the use of their works to train AI constitutes copyright infringement. is defending Mr. Mehta. The consolidated lawsuit currently includes plaintiff writers ranging from comedian Sarah Silverman, author Ta-Nehisi Coates, politician Mike Huckabee, and novelist Richard Kadry.
Mr. Lemley represents Meta as a partner in Lex Lumina LLP, a law firm comprised primarily of other academics focused on intellectual property, the First Amendment, antitrust law and adjacent areas. I was serving. This influential scholar has written 11 books and was the third most cited scholar in the world from 2016 to 2020, according to his Stanford University biography. He has also argued in dozens of appellate cases, including more than 30 U.S. Supreme Court cases, including Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith, in which the judge suppressed what might have constituted a “transformation” in fair use analysis. Participated in court proceedings as a lawyer or barrister.
At issue in Mehta’s case is whether creators of artificial intelligence infringe copyright by having their models learn from copyrighted works, regardless of the output. Creators say AI companies unfairly profit from their work without paying them and often rely on repositories of their work on pirated sites. But those who argue that AI is fair use argue that one of the millions of pieces of work has little impact on the model or its output, and they must pay for every piece of work used. They argue that this will inhibit the development of paradigm-changing technologies.
Lemley, director of Stanford University’s Law, Science and Technology Program, formally withdrew from the lawsuit Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the docket said.
Lemley also said he would deactivate his account on Threads (Facebook’s Twitter-like microblogging) and refrain from clicking on ads on Facebook to deny meta commissions on purchases. He said he had considered leaving Facebook, but “because Mr. Zuckerberg is going through a midlife crisis,” “it seemed unfair to lose” the connections Facebook had brought him.
Mehta and Lemley did not respond to requests for comment.
The CEO cited free speech concerns, including pressure from President Joe Biden to censor coronavirus-related content, in an Aug. 26 letter to Congress. He was pointing out a point. But critics said the recent changes would further open the door to hate speech in an already often contentious forum.
Zuckerberg also said in an interview with podcaster Joe Rogan that he wants to create a welcoming environment and see women succeed, but that “a culture that celebrates aggression a little bit more has its own very “There are positive benefits to this,” he said.
The case is Kadrey v. Meta Platforms Inc., ND Cal., No. 3:23-cv-03417, Notice of Withdrawal 25/1/13.
