{"slug": "3-count-lego-jacket", "title": "3 Count: Lego Jacket", "summary": "The United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower-court ruling favoring Thomson Reuters in its copyright case against Ross Intelligence, which Thomson Reuters sued in 2020 over Ross's use of Westlaw headnotes to train its AI systems. The appeals court rejected Ross's fair-use defense, and the appeal itself remains sealed pending motions on redactions expected within ten days. In a separate case, a Connecticut court denied Lego's motion for summary judgment in designer James Concannon's suit over a Queer Eye minifigure jacket, rejecting Lego's implied-license and fair-use arguments and moving the case toward trial.", "body_md": "# 3 Count: Lego Jacket\n\n*Have any suggestions for the 3 Count? Let me know via [Bluesky](https://bsky.app/profile/plagiarismtoday.com), [Mastodon](https://mastodon.world/@plagiarismtoday) or [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/in/plagiarismtoday/).*\n\n#### 1: [US Appeals Court Upholds Thomson Reuters’ Landmark Win in AI Training Lawsuit](https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/us-appeals-court-upholds-thomson-reuters-landmark-win-ai-training-lawsuit-2026-09-29/)\n\nFirst off today, Blake Brittain at Reuters reports that the United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a lower‑court decision favoring the legal aggregation company Thomson Reuters in its long‑running copyright case against the AI company Ross Intelligence.\n\nThomson Reuters sued Ross in 2020, alleging copyright infringement. According to the complaint, Ross used Thomson Reuters’s content to train its AI systems. In particular, the case focused on Ross’s use of Thomson Reuters’s Westlaw headnotes, which provide summaries of court opinions.\n\nRoss attempted to argue that its training was fair use. However, the lower court rejected that argument, prompting Ross to appeal. The appeal itself is still sealed, pending motions about what should be redacted from it. Those motions are expected within ten days.\n\n#### 2: [Miles Davis Tattoo Calls Ninth Circuit’s Infringement Test Into Question](https://www.courthousenews.com/miles-davis-tattoo-calls-ninth-circuits-infringement-test-into-question/)\n\nNext up today, Edvard Pettersson at Courthouse News Service reports that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard a rare en banc hearing in a copyright‑infringement lawsuit involving a photo of Miles Davis and the tattoo artist Kat Von D.\n\nVon D was sued by photographer Jeff Sedik, who claimed that Von D had infringed on his copyright in a photo of the musician Miles Davis when creating a tattoo and posting about it on social media. However, even though the photo and the tattoo were identical, a jury found that the two were not “substantially similar.”\n\nSedik appealed, arguing that the district’s extrinsic‑intrinsic test was outdated and that the court should have used a purely intrinsic test instead.\n\nA three‑judge panel at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously ruled on the matter, siding with the lower court but agreed that the extrinsic‑intrinsic test was outdated, and called for an en banc hearing with all 11 judges to rule on the matter. That en banc hearing mattered, with both sides arguing their case. But even if Sedik wins the appeal, there will still have to be discussions about fair use and other potential defenses.\n\n#### 3: [A Designer Says Lego Recreated His Jacket for a ‘Queer Eye’ Set. Now a Copyright Case Is Headed Toward Trial](https://www.inc.com/lucia-auerbach/designer-says-lego-recreated-jacket-queer-eye-set-copyright-case-headed-toward-trial/91411433)\n\nFinally today, Lucia Auerbach at Inc reports that a court in Connecticut has denied a motion for summary judgment in a lawsuit that pits a designer from the show Queer Eye against the toy giant Lego.\n\nIn 2021, Lego released a special set dedicated to show. As part of that set, they featured a minifigure of Antoni Porowski, one of the show’s designers. As part of that figure, the minifigure was wearing a jacket similar to the one that Porowski wore on an episode of the show, which was designed and given to him by James Concannon.\n\nHowever, Concannon said that he never licensed the jacket to Lego and filed a complaint shortly after the set debuted. In the most recent motion, the court rejected Lego’s argument that it had an implied license to recreate the jacket and also rejected Lego’s fair use defense. This leaves Lego with few options as the case moves forward towards a potential trial.\n\n*The 3 Count Logo was created by [Justin Goff](https://about.me/jbgoff) and is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).*\n\n#### Want to Reuse or Republish this Content?\n\nIf you want to feature this article in your site, classroom or elsewhere, just let us know! We usually grant permission within 24 hours.", "url": "https://wpnews.pro/news/3-count-lego-jacket", "canonical_source": "https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2026/09/30/3-count-lego-jacket-2/", "published_at": "2026-09-30 16:02:29+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-09-30 16:16:47.427018+00:00", "lang": "en", "topics": ["artificial-intelligence", "ai-policy"], "entities": ["Thomson Reuters", "Ross Intelligence", "United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals", "Westlaw", "Lego", "James Concannon", "Antoni Porowski", "Queer Eye"], "also_reported_by": [], "alternates": {"html": "https://wpnews.pro/news/3-count-lego-jacket", "markdown": "https://wpnews.pro/news/3-count-lego-jacket.md", "text": "https://wpnews.pro/news/3-count-lego-jacket.txt", "jsonld": "https://wpnews.pro/news/3-count-lego-jacket.jsonld"}}