Marcella Ballard

Subscribe to Marcella Ballard's Posts

Marcella Ballard is co-chair of Venable's IP Litigation - Advertising, Brand, and Copyright Group. Marci is a seasoned first-chair Lanham Act and copyright litigator who represents clients before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), and in bench and jury trials. Marci also represents clients in arbitration hearings throughout the United States and in the United Kingdom. Several well-known global brands rely on her sophisticated litigation skills and sage counsel in global trademark matters and brand management functions. She also manages global IP portfolios, and counsels clients on brand protection, trademark, copyright, trade secret, privacy rights, licensing, unfair competition, contracts, and business tort claims.

Contact:Read more about Marcella Ballard

In the second landmark decision this week relating to whether use of copyrighted content for training generative AI qualifies as a fair use, Judge Chhabria, in the federal court for the Northern District of California, ordered summary judgment in favor of Meta Platforms Inc. (Meta), finding that Meta’s copying of a group of 13 bestselling authors’ books as training data for use in Meta’s large language training model (LLM) “Llama” was a fair use. Kadrey, et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Case No. 23-cv-0317-VC. This groundbreaking decision out of the NDCA follows Judge Alsup’s ruling earlier this week that Anthropic’s use of legally obtained books for training its LLMs was a fair use, Bartz et al. v. Anthropic PBC, which we covered here.

The orders in both cases determined that the LLM’s use of copyrighted data for training generative AI was “highly transformative” and that the first copyright fair use factor therefore weighed heavily in favor of the AI developers. In both cases, the plaintiffs were unable to demonstrate sufficient market harm to overcome the heavy weight placed on the transformative nature of the AI models. The decisions, however, differed notably as to each judge’s consideration of the source of the copyrighted works and whether the works were obtained through authorized channels or from “pirate websites.”Continue Reading Back-to-Back Fair Use Decisions: Two NDCA Courts Find Fair Use for AI Training, Emphasizing That the Specific Facts Concerning Alleged Market Harm Will Be Critical in Overcoming AI’s “Highly Transformative” Technology

On June 23, 2025, Judge Alsup in the Northern District of California issued an order in Bartz et al. v. Anthropic PBC, granting in part and denying in part Defendant Anthropic’s motion for summary judgment on the sole issue of whether its use of Plaintiffs’ books as training data for Anthropic’s large language models (LLMs) was “quintessential” fair use.

Central to its mixed holding, the court acknowledged that Anthropic used the works in various ways and for varying purposes, such that each “use” must be identified and assessed separately. Ultimately, the court held that while the use of textual works to train LLMs was “exceedingly transformative” and thereby was protected as fair use when considered against the remaining factors, the separate use of the works to create a central library was only fair use with respect to works purchased or lawfully accessed—i.e., the use of pirated copies to create the central library was not protectible fair use. This decision makes clear that the source of content is a key element in evaluating fair use.Continue Reading Court Holds That Anthropic’s Training of AI Using Legally Obtained Books Is Fair Use, but Storage of Pirated Books Is Not

On February 11, 2025, Judge Stephanos Bibas issued an opinion in Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GMBH v. Ross Intelligence Inc., civ. no. 1:20-cv-613, a dispute regarding copyright infringement allegations stemming from the use of copyrighted data from the Westlaw legal database used in the training of an AI search tool. Judge Bibas, sitting by designation in this matter from the Third Circuit, granted partial summary judgment to Thomson Reuters on direct copyright infringement and determined that Thomson Reuters’ Westlaw key number system and more than 2,200 headnotes were impermissibly used to create Ross’s competing product and are original enough to be protected by copyright.

After finding that the Westlaw system was copyrightable, Judge Bibas rejected Ross’s fair-use defense. In the highly anticipated opinion, Judge Bibas found that two key factors of the “four factor fair use analysis” favored Thomson Reuters. Specifically, the purpose of Ross’s use of headnotes from Thomson Reuters’ Westlaw legal research service and its harm to the market for the originals both favor Thomson Reuters. Therefore, Ross’s fair use defense failed, and using Westlaw’s copyrighted headnotes to train Ross’s AI search tool was found to be copyright infringement.Continue Reading Judge Rejects Fair Use Defense in Thomson Reuters’ AI Copyright Suit Against Ross Intelligence

Venable attorneys Marcella Ballard and Kristen Ruisi recently participated in an MIP Global Trademark Forum panel on Responsible Advertising, Social Media and Influencers. With Marci moderating and Kristen presenting, the panel also included Jessica E. Cardon, deputy general counsel at Quality King Distributors; Lydia Cheuk, deputy general counsel at Away; and Melissa Moriarty, assistant general counsel at VaynerMedia. During their discussion, panelists shared the following insights:

  1. Brands are relying more on influencers, leading to increased FTC scrutiny

Kristen spoke about how the FTC is becoming stricter in its enforcement of its guidelines, which strive to prevent influencers from making false claims about products or services they haven’t tried and ensure that consumers are aware of advertising relationships. While the responsibility to disclose relationships with the brand they are promoting or endorsing ultimately rests with the influencer, brands still have to work with influencers to ensure they are meeting their disclosure obligations.Continue Reading Panel Recap: Responsible Advertising, Social Media and Influencers