When AI learns from the press: A defining copyright case C-250/25, Like Company v Google Ireland Limited
The IP community is currently discussing Case C-250/25, Like Company v Google Ireland Limited, which may become the first case in which the EU's highest court clarifies the framework and conditions applicable to AI training and AI-generated outputs from a copyright standpoint. The case concerns the use of copyright-protected works published by a Hungarian online news portal operator, Like Company, in connection with Google's AI system, Gemini.
✅ In particular, the Court may address the lawfulness of using such protected works in relation to the relatively new category of neighbouring rights known as press publishers' rights under Article 15 of the DSM Directive. The case is also expected to provide clarification regarding the right of reproduction (Article 2 of the InfoSoc Directive) and the right of communication to the public (Article 3(2) of the InfoSoc Directive), as well as their potential infringement by Google Ireland.
The case is already being treated as a potential future landmark decision in this field and the judgment is expected by late 2026. I recently came across an interesting analytical overview of the questions submitted to the CJEU. As is often said, only by asking the right questions can one expect meaningful answers.
The questions referred to the Court can be found here: https://lnkd.in/dvP6i-7B
The European Copyright Society has published an opinion on the request for a preliminary ruling in Case C-250/25. Worth reading here: https://lnkd.in/dbQzWvr8
✅ Personally, I am particularly interested in how the Court will interpret the scope of the text and data mining exception (Article 4 of the DSM Directive) in relation to both the input stage (AI training) and the output stage conducted by Gemini. Notably, Google also invokes the exception for temporary acts of reproduction under Article 5(1) of the InfoSoc Directive alongside the TDM exception. Another key issue will be whether displaying a summary of a news article in response to a user query could constitute an infringement of the right of communication to the public and if a "new public" appears in this case.
← Back to Articles
✅ In particular, the Court may address the lawfulness of using such protected works in relation to the relatively new category of neighbouring rights known as press publishers' rights under Article 15 of the DSM Directive. The case is also expected to provide clarification regarding the right of reproduction (Article 2 of the InfoSoc Directive) and the right of communication to the public (Article 3(2) of the InfoSoc Directive), as well as their potential infringement by Google Ireland.
The case is already being treated as a potential future landmark decision in this field and the judgment is expected by late 2026. I recently came across an interesting analytical overview of the questions submitted to the CJEU. As is often said, only by asking the right questions can one expect meaningful answers.
The questions referred to the Court can be found here: https://lnkd.in/dvP6i-7B
The European Copyright Society has published an opinion on the request for a preliminary ruling in Case C-250/25. Worth reading here: https://lnkd.in/dbQzWvr8
✅ Personally, I am particularly interested in how the Court will interpret the scope of the text and data mining exception (Article 4 of the DSM Directive) in relation to both the input stage (AI training) and the output stage conducted by Gemini. Notably, Google also invokes the exception for temporary acts of reproduction under Article 5(1) of the InfoSoc Directive alongside the TDM exception. Another key issue will be whether displaying a summary of a news article in response to a user query could constitute an infringement of the right of communication to the public and if a "new public" appears in this case.