Judge sharply criticizes lawyers for authors in AI suit against Meta
A federal judge on Friday brutally dressed down the lawyers for a group of high-profile authors who are suing Meta over the use of their work to train the company's AI technology.
U.S. District Court Judge Vincent Chhabria accused the plaintiffs' attorneys of dragging out litigation that may help set important guardrails for the emerging technology.
"You are not doing your job. This is an important case," Chhabria told lead counsel Joseph Saveri during an hour-long video conference about fact-finding issues in the case. "You and your team have taken on a case that you are either unwilling or unable to litigate properly."
The suit is one of a flurry of cases publishing companies, artists and authors filed last year against big tech companies, accusing them of importing copyrighted material into AI training models without permission. The companies have raised various defenses, chiefly that their actions qualify as "fair use" — a category of re-use that doesn't require compensation or a license.
The proposed class-action case before Chhabria, a San Francisco-based appointee of President Barack Obama, was filed in July 2023 and drew immediate attention because the plaintiffs included comedian Sarah Silverman, along with authors Christopher Golden and Richard Kadrey. An amended complaint filed last December added claims on behalf of other prominent authors such as Ta-Nehisi Coates, Michael Chabon and playwright David Henry Hwang.
Chhabria complained Friday that lawyers for the authors have been too passive in demanding and digesting documents and data needed to resolve the competing legal claims.
"It's very clear to me from the papers, from the docket and from talking to the magistrate judge that you have brought this case and you have not done your job to advance it," the judge said. "You and your team have barely been litigating the case. That's obvious....This is not your typical proposed class action. This is an important case. It's an important societal issue. It's important for your clients."
Saveri and another attorney working with him told the judge they hadn't tried to delay the case and were being blamed for agreeing to extensions Meta sought.
Last November, Chhabria threw out most of the claims in the suit, calling some of them "nonsensical." On Friday, the judge said there was "no way" he would appoint Saveri and his co-counsel as class counsel "based on the way you've litigated the case so far."
"I think what you need, frankly, is to bring in somebody who can help you litigate the case, who has the resources and the wherewithal to move this case forward...I think you need to reconstitute your legal team," the judge said, suggesting the plaintiffs consider involving Susman Godfrey, a Houston-based firm pressing similar AI lawsuits on behalf of other authors and the New York Times.
An attorney for Meta, Kathleen Hartnett, said the situation involving documents and depositions was not as dire as the judge perceived and that the case could move forward with just a little more time to complete those tasks.
"Just from my client's perspective, we prefer not to have to relitigate the whole case," said Hartnett, a partner with the Palo Alto-based law firm Cooley. "I don't think it's so below the standard that it's going to be an absence of counsel for the plaintiffs...I do think the message has gotten through that this actually has to be litigated as a case."
Chhabria ultimately extended a deadline for depositions in the case to mid-October and said he'd consider other extensions if Saveri comes back with a different legal team.
Saveri stopped short of saying he'd shake up his legal team for the case, but said he would act to address the judge's concerns.
"I do take your criticism seriously and I'm confident that we'll be able to address it," Saveri said. "But the proof of the pudding is in the eating....I aim to prove that to you and so, I hear you on that, your honor."
