Brothzilla, or "It's a Cruel Thing to Disrupt Your Estranged Sister's Expensive Destination Wedding"
And there's a defamation case stemming from all that.
And there's a defamation case stemming from all that.
Idaho Supreme Court finds false caselaw quotations, after jury found false factual assertions.
"[D]efendant purportedly posted more than 20 videos ... attacking plaintiff's character with 'blatantly false allegations of wrongdoing' and 'highly offensive and demeaning fake [AI] videos.'"
Their defamation and breach of contract case against Stefanie Lambert can go forward, a judge concluded.
"Professor Abdou provides no authority which stands for the proposition that expressing disapproval of a foreign terrorist organization in a Congressional hearing amounts to discrimination or creates a hostile work environment ...."
The court is unmoved by plaintiff's claims that defendants' coverage of the underlying dispute led to people threatening her.
Jane and I examine the Robby Starbuck v. Google decision, one of the first major court opinions arising from generative AI "hallucinations."
UPDATE: Though this opinion was handed down just two weeks ago, it turns out to be a slightly revised version of an opinion from July 2022; my apologies for not noticing this at the outset.
The recommendation includes entry of a default judgment against Boteach in a defamation lawsuit brought against him by a Florida hotel.
A sample allegation: "[T]his was orchestrated because at this point, you fucking know that this was not an original idea. You know that it was stolen from a black creator, and you are still doing backflips to make excuses for that."
A Delaware trial court has denied Google's motion to dismiss, and concluded that, if the facts as alleged by Starbuck were true, he would have a legal basis for recovery.
A Magistrate Judge recommended today that the injunction be denied on First Amendment prior restraint grounds.
The court concluded that there wasn't enough evidence that the Post's statement (which the Post later retracted) was said with "actual malice," which is to say knowledge or recklessness about its falsehood.
can go forward, Georgia appellate court rules.
"'Yeah, I had no idea it was false. Yeah, that's right. Yeah,' then demand summary judgment because no one possesses contrary evidence from inside his head. That may be the ticket for comedy. It is not the ticket for summary judgment."
Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.