EU court adviser says Gemini's real-time reuse of press articles may infringe publishers' rights
In case C-250/25, Like Company v Google, Advocate General Szpunar advised that a chatbot retrieving and reusing a press article to answer a user may infringe the press publisher's right; the opinion is not binding and the Court has yet to rule.
Why it matters
This is the first generative-AI case to reach the EU Court of Justice, and the opinion separates training from answering. Szpunar said questions about training Gemini were inadmissible because there was no evidence Like Company's articles were used, adding that training is, as a rule, permitted under the text and data mining exception. Only the specific expression of an article is protected, not the facts it reports. The Court's eventual judgment will shape whether publishers can license or block chatbot answers built from their journalism across the EU.
Key facts
- Case C-250/25, Like Company v Google Ireland
- Opinion by Advocate General Maciej Szpunar, 3 November 2026
- Training questions advised inadmissible
- Training generally permitted under the TDM exception
- Facts are not protected, only their expression
- Opinion is not binding