Nick Rishwain
@nickjrishwain
131 Following
217 Followers
๐ค ๐ช๐ต๐ฒ๐ป ๐๐
๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ถ๐๐ฒ ๐ง๐ต๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ป๐ ๐ง๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ ๐ฆ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐๐: ๐๐ ๐๐
๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ ๐ค๐๐ฎ๐น๐ถ๐ณ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป
There are so many AI-copyright lawsuits taking place, it's hard to keep up. Mostly, I can't keep up unless something pertinent grabs my attention. In the ongoing case of ๐ผ๐ฃ๐๐๐ง๐จ๐๐ฃ ๐ซ. ๐๐ฉ๐๐๐๐ก๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ผ๐ ๐๐ฉ๐., a fascinating dispute has emerged over the appointment of Dr. Ben Zhao as an expert witness, highlighting considerations for lawyers, experts, judges, and parties to the litigation.
๐ช๐ต๐ ๐ฃ๐น๐ฎ๐ถ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ณ๐ณ๐ ๐ช๐ฎ๐ป๐ ๐๐ฟ. ๐ญ๐ต๐ฎ๐ผ
The plaintiffs argue Dr. Zhao is indispensable due to his unparalleled expertise in AI image generation. They assert his research on how generative AI models process and replicate copyrighted works is directly relevant to their claims of copyright infringement. Dr. Zhaoโs credentials are impressive: over 190 published papers, 38,000 citations, and recognition as one of Timeโs 100 most influential people in AI in 2024. His qualifications position him as uniquely qualified to help the court understand the technical nuances of their case. Plaintiffs emphasize that disqualifying Dr. Zhao would severely prejudice their ability to contest the defendantsโ fair use arguments, as few independent experts of his caliber exist.
๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ป ๐ฒ๐
๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ ๐๐ถ๐๐ป๐ฒ๐๐ ๐น๐ผ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ, ๐ ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐ป ๐๐ฒ๐น๐น ๐๐ผ๐ ๐ ๐ฑ๐ผ๐ป'๐ ๐ฏ๐ ๐๐ต๐ถ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ด๐๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐. ๐ ๐ฎ๐๐ฏ๐ฒ ๐ ๐๐ผ๐๐น๐ฑ ๐ต๐ฎ๐๐ฒ ๐ฏ๐ฒ๐น๐ถ๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐ถ๐ป ๐ฐ-๐ฑ ๐๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ ๐ฎ๐ด๐ผ.
๐ช๐ต๐ ๐๐ฒ๐ณ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐ฎ๐ป๐๐ ๐ข๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฒ ๐๐ฟ. ๐ญ๐ต๐ฎ๐ผ
The defendants, Stability AI and others, counter that Dr. Zhaoโs involvement poses a conflict of interest. It really has to do with his own research and personal interests, rather than a competitive conflict. They highlight his research focus on developing tools to โdisruptโ or โpoisonโ text-to-image models like those at issue in the case, citing projects like โNightshadeโ and his forthcoming โHemlockโ paper. Defendants argue providing Dr. Zhao access to their highly confidential LLM code/training data would create an unacceptable risk, given his ongoing work to undermine similar AI systems. They contend that the plaintiffs have not demonstrated that Dr. Zhao is the only qualified expert available, and point to a much larger pool of possibilities.
๐๐ฒ๐ ๐ง๐ฎ๐ธ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐๐ฎ๐๐:
This dispute underscores the difficulties courts face when weighing expertise and trade secrets. Personally, I believe the defendants make a convincing argument. Lawfare is like warfare. You don't really want to give your enemy your secrets. For lawyers, itโs a reminder to thoroughly vet experts for potential conflicts while anticipating opposing arguments about bias. For experts, it highlights the importance of maintaining neutrality, credibility, and reputation.
How do you think the judge should rule?
@birdnals @codeofcrypto @mccallios
https://chatgptiseatingtheworld.com/2025/05/27/parties-in-andersen-v-stability-ai-fight-over-whether-dr-ben-y-zhao-co-creator-of-nightshade-tool-for-prompt-specific-poisoning-attacks-v-ai-models-should-get-access-to-confidential-source/ 1 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
1 recast
2 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
4 recasts
8 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
3 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
1 recast
7 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
5 reactions