法律 AI // 资讯总览
需要被持续追踪的
法律 AI 信号。
本期索引按监管、判例、实务与研究归档;可依主题或关键字定位已发布记录。
法律 AI // 资讯总览
本期索引按监管、判例、实务与研究归档;可依主题或关键字定位已发布记录。
原题: 3rd Circuit Issues Opinion in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Case, But For Now It Is Sealed
涉及法律行业大模型应用、律所与企业法务数智化实践指引。
美国第三巡回上诉法院就汤森路透与已停止运营的法律人工智能研究公司ROSS Intelligence之间持续多年的版权争议发布了意见,同时发布命令将该意见暂时置于密封状态,公众目前无法查阅全文。现有信息未披露法院对版权侵权、训练数据使用、法律研究内容复制或其他争议事项的具体认定,也无法确认裁判结果、适用理由及是否包含可供后案援引的规则。密封措施目前主要约束案件公开查阅与信息披露,直接相关主体包括诉讼当事人、代理律师及需要引用该意见的其他诉讼参与者。在法院解除密封、修改命令或发布公开版本前,外部机构只能依据公开案卷信息掌握程序进展,不能将未公开内容视为已确认的裁判规则。
展示来源全文,完整内容以原文页面为准。
3rd Circuit Issues Opinion in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Case, But For Now It Is Sealed
By
Bob Ambrogi
on
September 29, 2026
Tweet
Share
Share
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today issued an opinion in the long-running copyright battle between Thomson Reuters and the now-shuttered AI legal research company ROSS Intelligence, but the opinion is, at least for now, sealed and not viewable by the public.
The court issued the opinion under seal together with an order stating only as follows:
“The opinion in this matter has been temporarily filed as a sealed document. The parties are hereby directed to provide the Court with proposed redactions from the opinion, together with the reason for each redaction within 10 days of the date of this order. The Court will then determine whether to accept the proposed redactions and will unseal the opinion in an appropriate form. Proposed redactions are to be filed with the Clerk’s office using the SEALED response event in ECF.” For further background on this case, see my archive of coverage.
Meanwhile, stay tuned for further development.
Bob Ambrogi
Bob is a lawyer, veteran legal journalist, and award-winning blogger and podcaster. In 2011, he was named to the inaugural Fastcase 50, honoring “the law’s smartest, most courageous innovators, techies, visionaries and leaders.” Earlier in his career, he was editor-in-chief of several legal publications, including The National Law Journal, and editorial director of ALM’s Litigation Services Division.
当前已知的核心法律问题不是法院是否确立了某项版权规则,而是裁判意见及相关命令暂未向公众开放,导致外部无法核实其事实认定、法律推理和救济范围。该信息不支持推断法院已经认定法律人工智能训练或复制行为违法,也不支持直接判断其对其他案件的先例效力。除非法院后续公开意见或修改密封命令,否则公众无法据此确认实体裁判标准。
涉及法律人工智能研发、版权许可或相关诉讼的企业及律师,应持续核查第三巡回法院公开案卷和后续密封、解封命令,并以正式公开文本为依据更新案件研判。在意见公开前,不宜引用未获证实的裁判内容、向客户断言法院已确立某种训练数据或内容复制规则,也不应披露可能受密封命令约束的案件材料。该事件不要求一般企业因目前可见信息立即停止内部研发或改变既有版权合规流程,但应保留许可、数据来源和内容使用记录,以便在公开裁判后评估影响。
文书与研报规范引注
《第三巡回法院发布汤森路透与ROSS案密封意见》(来源: LawNext,发布日期: 2026/09/30,访问链接: https://www.lawnext.com/2026/09/3rd-circuit-issues-opinion-in-thomson-reuters-v-ross-case-but-for-now-it-is-sealed.html)