Meta Denies Seeding Claims In Defense Of Allegedly Pirating Books To Train AI

hero meta hides behind seeding argument pirating
The legal battle between authors and Meta over copyright infringement continues. Following the plaintiffs' (Sarah Silverman, Richard Kadrey, Christopher Golden,  et al., ) amended claim last month, Meta filed a reply on Tuesday, denying allegations of seeding (continuing to host files available on your systems so that other users can download it), infringements of copyright management information (CMI), and violations of California's Computer Data Access and Fraud Act ( CDAFA).

The crux of this suit concerns copyright infringement, and in response to the plaintiff's amended claim, Meta contends that torrenting material does not equate to seeding it, arguing that torrenting is simply a tool for downloading large files. Meta denies the seeding allegations, stating that it implemented precautionary measures to prevent such activity. Meta further argues that the works were publicly accessible and that the plaintiffs have failed to provide substantiating evidence linking it to the alleged seeding.

While Meta's argument seems plausible, it could be undermined by internal communications from the company indicating that seeding occurred. Additionally, testimony from a Meta executive responsible for project management revealed that the company implemented modifications to torrenting settings to minimize seeding activity, thereby suggesting it actually took place.

Meta has also refuted the claim that it stripped CMI from its training data to prevent infringement detection and avoid queries, contending that there is no evidence to substantiate the claim and that it publicly disclosed using copyrighted material from the beginning, providing detailed information about its training data.

body meta hides behind seeding argument pirating

Concerning the CDAFA claim, the plaintiffs argue that Meta's torrenting constitutes unauthorized access, a violation of the Act. Meta, however, argues preemption by copyright law, asserting that the claim is properly a copyright issue, not a CDAFA matter. The plaintiffs contend that Meta's actions, either through direct file sharing (seeding) or by making the files available via torrenting, have caused compensable harm. Meta has, however, reserved its detailed response to the seeding allegations for its summary judgment filing.

While the lawsuit's outcome remains uncertain, it will undoubtedly have a considerable impact, possibly setting precedence on how AI models are trained moving forward, and potentially affecting data sourcing, copyright management, and the legal framework surrounding AI development in general.