Generative AI Training Case Flags Competition as Major Factor

Duane Morris attorneys Jennifer Lantz, Jeremy Elman and Max DiBaise authored the Bloomberg Law article, “Generative AI Training Case Flags Competition as Major Factor,” exploring what the Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence decision’s novel application of the “fair use” defense of copyright law means for generative AI training.

Companies must be mindful of the ultimate purpose of new artificial intelligence tools to avoid running into copyright infringement issues during the training process. If widely adopted, the Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence decision suggests “intermediate copying” cases are unlikely to provide a strong defense when the final output of a tool mirrors the products it was trained on. Accordingly, the key question is likely to what extent the AI system is competing with the underlying copyrighted work. The further away the system is, the more likely it is to be protected under the fair-use doctrine. Read the full article on the Bloomberg Law website.

What Should GenAI Not Do in Healthcare?

With the advent of generative AI models like Med-PaLM and ChatGPT, providers can now type complex medical questions into a chat box and receive sophisticated (and hopefully accurate) answers. This ability surpasses previous AI applications in the potential to serve patients, but also in the potential to run afoul of laws like corporate practice of medicine (CPOM) rules, the False Claims Act (FCA), and FDA regulations. These concerns — on top of the risk of a generative AI model fabricating answers, known as “hallucinations” — mean that providers should proceed with extreme caution before implementing generative AI tools into their practices.

Read the full article by Matthew Mousley on the Wharton Healthcare Quarterly website.

FTC launches GenAI investigation

The Federal Trade Commission announced today that it has begun an investigation into Generative AI investments and partnerships. The FTC is using its investigative power pursuant to Section 6(b) of the FTC act which allows the FTC to issue compulsory process (similar to a subpoena or Civil Investigative Demand) to learn information about an organization, without a specific law-enforcement purpose. Historically, the FTC has used its 6(b) power to conduct studies regarding particular industries or practices that may inform future agency positions or enforcement priorities.  The investigation announced today is a concrete fact-gathering step by the FTC regarding the regulation of Generative AI.

California’s Generative AI Report Addresses Benefits and Risks of AI

By Milagros  Astesiano and Ariel Seidner

Following Governor Newsom’s September 2023 Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence, the California’s state administration released a report analyzing the potential benefits and risks surrounding the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (“GenAI”) within the state government (“Report”). This is the first of many steps called for under the Executive Order.   Continue reading “California’s Generative AI Report Addresses Benefits and Risks of AI”

© 2009-2025 Duane Morris LLP. Duane Morris is a registered service mark of Duane Morris LLP.

The opinions expressed on this blog are those of the author and are not to be construed as legal advice.

Proudly powered by WordPress