Update and evidence

A US appeals court rules that ROSS could not rely on fair use to train on protected Westlaw legal summaries.

Record date

30 Sept 2026

Last verified

2026-10-04

Next review

2026-10-12

Opinion issued 30 September.

What happened

On 30 September, the US Third Circuit upheld a copyright ruling about Westlaw headnotes: short summaries of legal cases. ROSS used them to train a competing legal-search system. This was not a generative-AI system, and the ruling does not settle lawsuits about AI music models.

ALUN's view

ALUN's view: check what material an AI system uses, why it uses it and how it may compete with the source. Do not assume all AI training has a legal exemption.

What is still unclear

This US decision concerns non-generative legal search. It does not decide all generative-AI training, music-model disputes or Indonesian law. Its relevance is institutional data-use diligence, not a music-sector court outcome.

What it may mean for you

• Institutions: Review the source material and intended use before assuming training data is legally cleared.
• Policy makers: Preserve jurisdiction and model-type limits when comparing AI copyright decisions.

Where did this come from?

• Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH v. Ross Intelligence Inc., No. 25-2153

  US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, reproduced by Justia · Court judgment

  Source date: 2026-09-30

Source location: Opinion: fair-use analysis; distinction from generative models; conclusion