Center for Investigative Reporting Sues OpenAI, Microsoft Over Copyright
The Center for Investigative Reporting, publisher of Mother Jones and Reveal, has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft in federal court, alleging the companies used its copyrighted articles without permission or compensation to train their AI products. The nonprofit argues that the AI-generated summaries of its stories threaten journalism and violate the Copyright Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
- Company involved
- OpenAI and Microsoft
6 source articles · read the reporting →
Utah's online dispute resolution system leads to default judgments against defendants
Utah's online dispute resolution system for small claims cases automatically enters default judgments against defendants who fail to register within 14 days. Samantha Thompson missed the buried notice in her summons and was ordered to pay $995.42 plus wage garnishment. The system has increased default judgment rates, especially for payday lenders. Critics say the confusing paperwork disadvantages low-income litigants.
- Company involved
- Utah State Courts
- AI system involved
- Utah Online Dispute Resolution System
4 source articles · read the reporting →
Thomson Reuters wins copyright lawsuit against AI startup Ross Intelligence
In 2020, Thomson Reuters filed a copyright lawsuit against legal AI startup Ross Intelligence, alleging that Ross reproduced materials from its Westlaw legal research service. In February 2025, a US District Court judge ruled in Thomson Reuters' favor, finding that Ross infringed copyright and that fair use did not apply. Ross Intelligence had shut down in 2021 due to litigation costs.
- Company involved
- Ross Intelligence
- AI system involved
- Ross Intelligence
4 source articles · read the reporting →
Publishers sue AI startup Cohere over alleged copyright infringement
A consortium of 14 publishers including Condé Nast, The Atlantic, and Forbes filed a lawsuit against Cohere, alleging that the generative AI startup engaged in massive, systematic copyright infringement by using at least 4,000 copyrighted works to train its AI models and display large portions of articles, harming referral traffic. Cohere denied the allegations, calling the lawsuit misguided and frivolous.
- Company involved
- Cohere
- AI system involved
- Cohere's AI models
8 source articles · read the reporting →
Tyrone Walker v. Juliane Pierre (CA Massachusetts): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Struck from the record
The AI generated nonexistent legal citations that were included in a court filing, causing the court to strike them from the appellant's brief.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Pega's Hidden AI Tool Listens To US Bank Calls, Suit Says - Law360
The system secretly recorded customer service calls, affecting bank customers.
- Company involved
- U.S. Bancorp
1 source article · read the reporting →
Kansas judge fines lawyers $12,000 for AI-generated fake citations in patent case
A Kansas federal judge fined four lawyers a total of $12,000 for filing court documents containing non-existent quotations and case citations generated by ChatGPT. The lawyers, representing patent holder Lexos Media IP, failed to verify the AI's output, which included hallucinated legal authorities. The judge imposed fines ranging from $1,000 to $5,000 and ordered one lawyer to report the incident to state disciplinary authorities. The sanctioned attorneys acknowledged the error and stated that firms should implement strict policies for AI use.
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
2 source articles · read the reporting →
Ninth Circuit Sanctions Attorneys Over AI-Hallucinated Legal Briefs
The Ninth Circuit sanctioned immigration attorneys from Sethi Law Group after they filed briefs containing AI-generated false cases and quotations. The court imposed monetary sanctions, a six-month suspension from Ninth Circuit practice, and referred the matter to the California State Bar. The court also required future filings to disclose AI use and certify that all citations were verified. The case is Lnu v. Blanche.
- Company involved
- Sethi Law Group
2 source articles · read the reporting →
Mississippi Judge Removes All Attorneys Over AI-Hallucinated Citations
In Withers v. City of Aberdeen, a contract dispute, both sides' attorneys submitted briefs containing fabricated case citations generated by AI tools. The court identified six non-existent citations and sanctioned all four attorneys, revoking pro hac vice admissions, imposing fines, and referring them to state bars. The drafting attorneys had used AI research and drafting tools without verifying outputs, while local counsel signed filings without review. The ruling emphasises that attorneys cannot delegate verification duties to AI and that ignorance of AI risks is no defence.
- AI system involved
- First Drafts
2 source articles · read the reporting →
$335,000 and counting: Another WA local government settles Flock lawsuit - Cascadia Daily
The system captured images of vehicles and license plates, and the county failed to release them to a public records requester.
- Company involved
- Snohomish County
- AI system involved
- Flock Safety cameras
1 source article · read the reporting →
New Mexico lawyer fined over ChatGPT-generated court filing - UA.NEWS
An attorney filed an appellate document containing fabricated police testimony and nonexistent witnesses, affecting the client's appeal.
- Company involved
- Stephen Aarons (private attorney)
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
Herbert Brooks v. Lowes Home Centers LLC (W.D. Louisiana): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; CLE
Generated a legal brief with hallucinated case law, filed in court.
- AI system involved
- Claude
1 source article · read the reporting →
CommNV vs Uprise (Nevada DC): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Penalty OR Order to volunteer and teach about AI…
The AI system generated fabricated legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
- Company involved
- Christopher Day
1 source article · read the reporting →
OpenAI sued over alleged undisclosed human review of ChatGPT conversations - Top Class Actions
ChatGPT conversations were reviewed by third-party contractors without adequate disclosure to users.
- Company involved
- OpenAI OpCo LLC
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
New Meta smart glasses class action gives employers a reason to write the policy they've been puttin - hcamag.com
The smart glasses recorded bystanders without their consent and sent the footage to Meta for AI training.
- Company involved
- Meta Platforms
- AI system involved
- Meta AI-enabled Ray-Ban and Oakley smart glasses
1 source article · read the reporting →
Pearl Gardner v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC (D. Arizona): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Bar Referral
Pro Se Litigant | D. Arizona | State(s): USA. AI tool: Clearpoint. Problem: Fabricated: Case Law. Consequence: Bar Referral.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Boulder police chief faces class action over Flock cameras' warrantless surveillance - Courthouse News
The system captured and stored license plate data and vehicle movements of Boulder residents and commuters, making it searchable by law enforcement without a warrant.
- Company involved
- Boulder Police Department
- AI system involved
- Flock Safety
1 source article · read the reporting →
Del Biaggio v. Bansen (CA California (4d)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction
The AI generated fake legal citations that were included in an appellate brief, affecting the court and the client.
- Company involved
- Carlton Floyd
1 source article · read the reporting →
Capital Standard, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association (CA Florida (2d)): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction; Adverse Costs…
The AI generated false legal citations that were included in a court filing, misleading the court.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Jackie L. Miller v. Regions Bank (N.D. Alabama): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, DQ from case and court (6 months);…
Attorney H. Gregory Harp was sanctioned with a public reprimand, disqualification from the case, a six-month court suspension, and a bar referral for filing AI-hallucinated legal citations and deleting evidence.
- Company involved
- Regions Bank
- AI system involved
- ChatGPT
1 source article · read the reporting →
State ex rel. Steven Schnell v. Honorable Rebecca Richardson (CA Missouri): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Monetary Sanction
The AI-generated fictitious case citations misled the court and caused opposing counsel to incur attorney's fees.
- Company involved
- Jenna Rohr Conley
1 source article · read the reporting →
Re an Office-Holder; Cork v Smith (Chancery): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Public admonishment; SRA Referral
The AI system generated a non-existent insolvency rule that was submitted to the court, misleading the court.
- Company involved
- Pinsent Masons LLP
1 source article · read the reporting →
Registered Trustees of the Assemblies of God Gospel Church International (AGGCI) v Registrar of Societies and Others (High Court): AI-hallucinated…
The AI generated non-existent court case citations that were presented to the High Court, misleading the judge and opposing counsel.
1 source article · read the reporting →
Marion Parnell, Jr. v. Florida Department of Corrections (11th Cir. CA): AI-hallucinated content in court filing, Brief partly Struck; Adverse…
The AI generated a court filing containing non-existent legal cases, misleading the court and opposing counsel.
1 source article · read the reporting →
