Open AI reply to amended complaint Court Filing Kandis A. Westmore, November 3, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 1 of 13. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs’ Opposition fails to demonstrate how the First Amended Complaint (“FAC,” Dkt. No. 97-3) cures the many defects found in Plaintiffs’ original Complaint. The postComplaint “exemplary demonstrations” from Copilot (that Plaintiffs point to in an effort to allege standing) all required Plaintiffs to input substantial portions of their own code, showing that it is still not plausible that anyone other than Plaintiffs caused Copilot to output Plaintiffs’ code prior to the filing of the FAC. Plaintiffs therefore have shown that they cannot plausibly allege standing for monetary damages. Plaintiffs also cannot avoid preemption of their state law claims by recharacterizing their claims as “wrongful use” of their code as training data, when Plaintiffs seek to vindicate their rights to prepare derivative works of their code. Plaintiffs’ newly pled examples of outputs also confirm the implausibility of Plaintiffs’ DMCA claim. Plaintiffs do not dispute that they must provide the majority of Plaintiffs’ works as inputs in order to manufacture non-identical outputs from Copilot. In addition, Plaintiffs’ Opposition confirms that dismissal is appropriate for Plaintiffs’ state law claims for intentional and negligent interference with prospective economic relations, unjust enrichment, unfair competition, and negligence. These claims in the FAC should therefore be dismissed. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 3:22-cv-06823-KAW retrieved on September 2, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Storage.Courtlistener

OpenAI's Reply to the Amended Complaint: What Their Argument Is

OpenAI's Reply to the Amended Complaint: What They Have to Say

Too Long; Didn't Read

Boost your HackerNoon story @ $159.99! 🚀

The Intro to OpenAI's Reply to the Amended Complaint: A Peek Into the Court Case

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

20% of All General Searches in the U.S. Go Through the Default on User-Downloaded Version of Chrome

A Majority of Aussies Not Motivated to Pursue Content Further After Facing Blocked Pirate Sites

A Third Example of GitHub Copilot (Allegedly) Reproducing the Code of Others

Adult Site Furious Over Popping Delisting Cherry

AI-Generated Code and Copyright Infringement: Codex’s Attribution Problem

20% of All General Searches in the U.S. Go Through the Default on User-Downloaded Version of Chrome

A Majority of Aussies Not Motivated to Pursue Content Further After Facing Blocked Pirate Sites

A Third Example of GitHub Copilot (Allegedly) Reproducing the Code of Others

Adult Site Furious Over Popping Delisting Cherry

AI-Generated Code and Copyright Infringement: Codex’s Attribution Problem

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps