On Tuesday, Judge Bibas agreed, concluding that ROSS’s use of Westlaw’s content was both commercial and non-transformative, a determination that tipped the scales against fair use.
ROSS’s Defense Falls Flat
The lawsuit, filed in 2020, accused ROSS of deliberately circumventing copyright protections after Westlaw refused to license its database. Instead, ROSS allegedly partnered with LegalEase to obtain “bulk memos”—compilations of legal questions and answers that were ultimately sourced from Westlaw.
Judge Bibas was unpersuaded by ROSS’s arguments that its use of headnotes was covered under fair use, innocent infringement, or copyright misuse.
Market Impact Seals ROSS’s Fate
A key factor in the court’s reversal of its previous ruling was the market impact of ROSS’s AI tool.
Initially, Bibas had left this issue for a jury to decide, speculating that ROSS’s platform might serve a different purpose than Westlaw. But on Tuesday, the judge walked back that position.
The court ruled that ROSS’s AI model harmed the potential market for AI-powered legal research tools and that it was irrelevant whether Thomson Reuters had plans to develop its own AI search technology.
What’s Next for ROSS?
While Judge Bibas’s ruling delivers a crushing blow to ROSS’s defense, some issues remain unresolved, including whether certain copyrights have expired. These will be decided by a jury at a later stage.
