Eseandre Mordi
⬤ Google and Alphabet (GOOGL) are back in the spotlight as observers compare today's AI training lawsuits to the landmark Google Books case. The comparison suggests AI companies might win in court using the same legal logic that worked before—when copyrighted material gets transformed into something new that doesn't replace the original, courts have historically been okay with it.
⬤ Here's the thing: Google Books already set a precedent by digitizing millions of copyrighted books for search purposes without violating copyright law. Courts ruled it was fair because the output was transformative and didn't substitute for buying the actual books. Now, AI developers are betting that training models on massive text datasets falls into the same category—the models create new content rather than copying what they learned from.
⬤ Those backing this view say the connection is obvious. Both Google Books and modern AI systems process huge amounts of copyrighted content at scale, and both turn that material into something fundamentally different that doesn't compete with the source material. AI companies have been pushing this angle hard, framing their work as transformative innovation that fits comfortably within existing legal protections.
⬤ What happens next matters beyond just courtroom drama. These rulings will shape how fast AI can develop, what rules companies need to follow, and whether the legal fog around training data finally clears up. The verdict could either accelerate AI progress or force developers to completely rethink how they build and train their models.
Eseandre Mordi
