Merriam-Webster and its parent company Britannica are the latest AI courts. The plaintiff has Prosecution Confused, claiming that the AI company’s “Answer Engine” product illegally reproduces its copyrighted materials. They also accused copyright infringement of confusing AI to produce false or inaccurate hallucinations, which they then mislead to Great Britain or Merriam-Webster. this Filed in the federal court in New York, unspecified currency losses and orders to prevent confusion from abuse of its contents.
“The so-called “answer engine” eliminates user clicks and clicks to plaintiffs and other Web Publishers’ websites, thereby eliminating revenue hungry network publishers, responding to users’ responses to content alternatives in other information sites.” “To build their alternatives, troublesome involves large-scale replication of protected content by plaintiffs and other web publishers without authorization or compensation.”
This is not the first time facing allegations that it illegally adopted content from another website. AI company accused Wall Street Journal and New York Post. only A pair of Japanese media companies, Nikkei and asahi shimbunprosecuted with similar claims.
