The Future of Legal Research, Powered By Super Intelligence.

San Francisco, CA
Joined October 2014
Replying to @ROSSIntel
@RossIntel's request for more time to file its formal request for an en bank rehearing of a 3d Cir panel's decision against it in the @ThomsonReuters case has been ministerially granted. Look for that submission by or on 11/3:
1
1
3
487
how come no one is asking this?! strange, no?
And what companies does this model compete with?
1
8
438
what data was this trained on?
Introducing GLM-Legal Built on GLM-5.3-Flash, GLM-Legal matches frontier models on mainstream legal benchmarks. Designed for real legal workflows: contract review, evidence analysis, compliance, and more. Tech Blog: z.ai/blog/glm-legal Apply for API Access: z.ai/consultation/legal Try AutoClaw: autoclaw.z.ai
7
4
29
5,481
AI copyright litigation in the USA is brought to you by Franz Kafka
Andrew Curran
@AndrewCurran_Oct 11
HarperCollins, Simon & Schuster, and Hachette are using Claude and ChatGPT to email literary agents, write publicity and back-cover copy, design cover art, marketing materials, and draft rejection letters. AI use among authors is apparently also rampant now behind the scenes.
2
11
758
👀
“ROSS is the only appellate guidance available, and it should inform every AI training-data decision now.” bakerdonelson.com/third-circ…
1
3
424
Breaking: @RossIntel will soon, but not yet, move for an en banc rehearing of the recent 3d Circ panel decision against it in @ThomsonReuter's © infringement suit. For now, they've filed a 21-day extension to make that ask, which plaintiffs' do not oppose:
1
1
3
233
funny how things go
The rest, as they say, is history. ROSS Intelligence was one of OpenAI’s first ever GPT-3 partners, helping OpenAI “refine their API…testing its accuracy, speed, flexibility, and usefulness in the legal domain.” And then we were sued by Thomson Reuters.
1
5
437
many people are saying
TRACKED CHANGES: Thomson Reuters bought Casetext, a cheaper rival to Westlaw, then shut it down. A law firm says its monthly bill more than tripled as a result. Now it's leading a proposed class action against Thomson Reuters, ABA Journal reports.
1
1
8
1,444
“Private Section 7 cases can result in break-up-the-company injunctions.”
Replying to @syfert
I wouldn’t sleep on it. Will depend on discovery and expert reports, but I think it has legs. Private Section 7 cases can result in break-up-the-company injunctions. See Steves & Sons, Inc. v. JELD-WEN, Inc., 988 F.3d 690 (4th Cir. 2021), affirming 345 F. Supp. 3d 614 (E.D. Va. 2018).
1
1
6
4,657
Replying to @syfert
I wouldn’t sleep on it. Will depend on discovery and expert reports, but I think it has legs. Private Section 7 cases can result in break-up-the-company injunctions. See Steves & Sons, Inc. v. JELD-WEN, Inc., 988 F.3d 690 (4th Cir. 2021), affirming 345 F. Supp. 3d 614 (E.D. Va. 2018).
1
1
6
795
“Products blamed for incorrect citations: Westlaw for buying and raising the price on Casetext”
“Products blamed for incorrect citations: Westlaw for buying and raising the price on Casetext”
2
5
443
.@musicbizworld ran the math on what the TR v. ROSS decision means for Suno 60,202 recordings in the second suit, at the statutory maximum, is a ceiling just over $9 billion
“A market for licensing training data counts even if the rights holder never licensed into it... Suno pleads 60,202 recordings... that is a theoretical ceiling of just over $9 billion on the second suit alone.” musicbusinessworldwide.com/a…
2
1
404
2
4
158
The Supreme Court has made it clear: copyright is NOT monopolization. Fair use is supposed to prevent that. The Third Circuit whent against that to protect Westlaw's monopoly. xitter.cf/shanedk/status/2106422…
As I said in my video coverage of the ROSS decision, and the "creativity" of Thomson Reuters's headnotes: They can't go injecting their own opinions and viewpoints into a legal opinion. They can't be expressive and still do their job. That would be misleading people about what the judicial opinion says. Any creative spark would set a fire to someone depending on them for legal accuracy.
1
1
5
651
god bless @shanedk
This is how ridiculous the "creative spark" is!
2
1
5
443
This is how ridiculous the "creative spark" is!
As I said in my video coverage of the ROSS decision, and the "creativity" of Thomson Reuters's headnotes: They can't go injecting their own opinions and viewpoints into a legal opinion. They can't be expressive and still do their job. That would be misleading people about what the judicial opinion says. Any creative spark would set a fire to someone depending on them for legal accuracy.
1
2
1
5
656
It’s ridiculous.
For clarity, THIS is what they said is copyrighted.
8
10
1
104
14,987
“An open video model is a ROSS. InterPositive is a ROSS with Hollywood lighting. Netflix, which owns the output, is a ROSS that paid $587 million for the privilege.”
ben affleck says he wouldn't train on his peers' work, so he built on open models that already had. apply the 3rd circuit's TR v ROSS decision and it's infringement. i break down what affleck gets right, what he gets wrong and why the base layer is his too
1
8
463