As many of you may already know, the ongoing copyright lawsuit between the legal research behemoth Thomson Reuters and the now-quiet startups Ross Intelligence has been relatively mute for some time. The litigation alleges a breach of copyright by Ross, accusing the young company of stealing proprietary content from Westlaw to build its competing legal research product.
Finally, there’s progress within the case to report. Last week, 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Stephanos Bibas, stationed by designation in the U.S. District Court in Delaware, issued a memorandum substantially dismissing both parties’ motions for summary judgment. The move effectively pushes the case towards a trial, leaving the contested issues of copyright infringement in the hands of a jury.
Those of you keen on observing the development of this lawsuit through our past coverage can do so by visiting our archive.
In an essential part of the ruling, Judge Bibas tilted towards Thomson Reuters, determining ‘as a matter of law’ that Ross did indeed replicate Westlaw’s headline notes and other copyrighted materials from Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters managed to provide both direct and inferential evidence showing that Ross, in association with the legal research company LegalEase, reproduced its content. Pointedly, Thomson Reuters noted that LegalEase has confessed to straight copying of the headnotes.
However, when considering other components to validate a copyright infringement claim, Judge Bibas has confirmed the case is a ‘factual mess’. This situation, in his opinion, requires a thorough untangling by a jury during a trial, as opposed to a summary judgment by the presiding judge.
These components include the query of whether Thomson Reuters can allege copyrights over its key numbers and headnotes, which Ross maintains are merely unprotected compilations by the law, or reiterations of judicial opinions — exempted from copyright. Judge Bibas also opted against resolving Ross’ fair use defense or any remaining legal issues comprising the matter.
Our readers interested in drilling into the details can access the full decision here.