AI copyright news, graded by source

Fox asks the court to shield its AI training license with Meta from authors and publishers, and to make them destroy unredacted copies Meta produced by mistake

In a joint letter to Magistrate Judge Hixson, non-party Fox Corp. seeks a protective order over its license agreement with Meta, under which Fox supplies multimedia content, not books, for AI training, and over the related negotiations. Fox says redacted versions were produced by agreement, but that Meta inadvertently gave the plaintiffs unredacted copies of the agreement, drafts and negotiation emails; the plaintiffs sequestered them and declined to destroy them. Fox argues the material is irrelevant under the court's September 10 order, which held that a market for licensing AI training content is legally irrelevant, and that the price is competitively sensitive. The plaintiffs in the Cambronne, Chicken Soup for the Soul, Cognella and Entrepreneur Media cases respond that these are Meta's own documents, that Meta never objected to producing them, and that what Meta paid Fox bears on willfulness and on statutory damages as a measure of what it saved by "pirating" their works. They offer attorneys'-eyes-only limits and in camera review. These are each side's arguments in a discovery dispute; the license terms are not public and the court has not ruled.