Ottawa – Canadian artificial intelligence ministers are keeping a close watch on court cases in Canada and the US, determining the next steps for the government’s regulatory approach to AI.
Some AI companies have claimed that the initial victory and openi to the south of the border is now fighting the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case by news publishers.
Ivan Solomon’s office said in a statement that it is planning to address the copyright “within the comprehensive AI regulatory approach of Canada, with focus on protecting cultural sovereignty and how [creators] Factor in this conversation. ,
But there is no current plan for a stand-alone copyright bill, as Solomon’s office is “closely monitoring the ongoing court affairs and market development” to help pursue the route.
It is not clear how much time it will take to determine in those court cases whether artificial intelligence companies can use copyright content to train their AI products.
The only Canadian case was launched by a coalition of news publishers later last year to answer the question, and the Ontario Superior Court has been set to hear a judicial challenge in September.
The alliance, including the Canadian Press, Torrestar, The Globe and Mel, Postmaidia and CBC/Radio-Canada, sue the OpenIAI for using news materials to train its genetic artificial intelligence systems.
News publishers argue that Openai is violating copyright by scrapping large amounts of material from Canadian media, then earning profits from using that material without permission or compensation.
He said in the court filing that OpenEE is “ongoing, intentionally and unauthorized abuse. [their] Valuable news media works. ,
“Instead of looking for legally obtaining information, Openai has wrongly chosen the valuable intellectual property of news media companies and converted it for its own use, including commercial uses, without consent or consideration.”
Openai has denied the allegations, and earlier that its models are trained on publicly available data and “based in proper use and related international copyright principles.”
The company, headquartered in San Francisco, is challenging the jurisdiction of Ontario court to listen to the case.
It was argued in a court that it is not located in Ontario and does not trade in the province.
The company said, “There is no real or sufficient relationship with Ontario as the company said in the statement of the defendants and claims,” the company said.
Openai also argued that the Copyright Act does not apply outside Canada.
Openai is asking the court to seal some documents in the case. According to a program mentioned in the court documents, the court has been scheduled to hear the sealing proposal on 30 July.
This asked the court to seal the documents with “commercially sensitive” information, including information about its corporate organization and structure, its web crawling and procedures and systems include and information about its “model training and estimates process, system, resource allocation and cost structures.”
An affidavit presented by the company states, “Artificial intelligence industry is highly competitive and is growing rapidly. There are many contestants in this industry, and big, established technology companies such as Google and Amazon, from small startups to a foot in the industry.
“As a recognized leaders in the Artificial Intelligence Industry, contestants and potential contestants for defendants will benefit from access to the confidential information of the defendants.”
A lawyer for news publishers provided information about the court deadline, but did not comment on the case.
Many cases dealing with the AI system and copyright are going on in the United States, some dating are returning to 2023. In late June, AI companies won two cases.
In a case launched by a group of authors, including comedian Sara Silverman, a judge used the work published on the AI system, was appropriately used, and the authors did not demonstrate that the use would result in the result of the weakening of the market.
But the judge also said that his ruling affects only those specific writers – whose lawyers did not give the correct arguments – and this does not mean that the use of copyright content to the meta was legal to train its system. Judge Vince Chhabriya said in his summary decision that “in a grand plan of things, the results of this decision are limited.”
In a separate American case, a judge ruled that the books published by the AI company were appropriately used without permission to train its system without use by anthropic. But Judge William Alsup also ruled that the anthropic “was not entitled to use pirated copies.”
Jane Ginsburg, a professor at the Law School at Columbia University, who studies intellectual property and technology, stated that it would be very easy for AI companies to see cases as a complete victory.
Ginsburg said, “I think how much weight the pirate nature and market weakening of sources are to give, these are going to be big issues in both cases.”
This report of Canadian Press was first published on 19 July 2025.
Anja Kardglija, Canadian Press