Publication
Infringement risk relating to creation and use of the output of a generative AI system
Where the Output of a generative AI system is the same or substantially similar to a third party’s copyright work
Pleading the element of inducement for tortious interference with contract claims
New York Law Journal
In 1980, the New York Court of Appeals adopted §766 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts as the standard for a cause of action for tortious interference with contract in New York. Guard-Life v. S. Parker Hardware Mfg., 50 N.Y.2d 183, 189-90 (1980); see Alken Indus. v. Toxey Leonard & Assocs., 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 31864(U), at *5 (Suffolk Co. Aug. 2, 2013). The Restatement defines tortious interference with contract as “intentionally and improperly interfer[ing] with the performance of a contract… between another and a third person by inducing or otherwise causing the third person not to perform the contract.” Restatement (Second) of Torts §766 (Am. L. Inst. 1977). The requirement in this definition of “inducing or otherwise causing” the third person not to perform its contract has been extensively litigated in New York courts, which have required a somewhat heightened pleading standard for that element.
Read the full New York Law Journal article, "Pleading the element of inducement for tortious interference with contract claims."
Recent publications
Publication
Is the output of the generative AI system protected by intellectual property rights?
The approach and requirements for intellectual property rights to subsist in computer-generated works vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
Publication
Infringement risk relating to training a generative AI system
Generative AI systems are trained using vast amounts of data, often taken from sources in the public domain that may be protected by copyright or other intellectual property rights, such as, in the UK and EU, a database right.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .