AI on Trial: Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence

Non-Solicit or Non-Starter? When Employment Contracts Go Too Far

⭐ Special guest litigator Charles Garabedian [https://www.linkedin.com/in/charles-garabedian-79458059/] of Mark Migdal & Hayden Welcome back to the Lawsomesauce Podcast! In this episode of Lawsome Sauce, PJ and Harper explore Sunbelt Rentals v. Cox, a case where a non-solicitation clause aimed at protecting a company’s workforce backfired in court. When a former employee allegedly tried to recruit his old colleagues, Sunbelt Rentals sued—but their contract was so broad, covering thousands of employees across multiple states, that the court threw the case out. Special guest Charles Garabedian joins to explain why non-solicitation agreements must be narrowly written, how Florida courts view restrictive covenants, and what businesses (and employees) need to know before relying on these clauses to protect talent. For update on how the case is playing out visit Charles Garabedian on Linkedin [https://www.linkedin.com/posts/charles-garabedian-79458059_employmentlaw-restrictivecovenant-noncompete-activity-7310050708966289408-TgxI?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAAMj-7EBz0k0BpSbORgBFJp4HSnQbFODgew]

AI on Trial: Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence

⭐  Special guest : Grok 3, xAI Training data isn’t free—and now the courts agree. In this episode of Lawsomesauce, hosts PJ and Harper are joined by special guest Grok 3, an AI developed by xAI, to break down one of the most pivotal legal cases in the battle over AI training data: Thomson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence. The case centers on whether Ross Intelligence infringed copyrights by using Westlaw’s headnotes—editorial summaries owned by Thomson Reuters—to train a legal AI tool. With the court rejecting Ross’s fair use defense, the decision sends a powerful message to developers: training AI on copyrighted material is not risk-free.

Receivership on Ice: The McAllister Hotel Showdown

⭐ Special guest litigator Maia Aron [https://markmigdal.com/maia-aron/] of Mark Migdal & Hayden Welcome back to the Lawsome Sauce Podcast! In this episode, PJ and Harper explore what happens when family meets finance—and the stakes involve a luxury hotel in postwar Miami. The case in question is McAllister Hotel v. Schatzberg, a landmark 1949 decision in which the Florida Supreme Court reaffirmed the limits of receivership. Join us as we unpack a corporate power struggle, delve into the doctrine of “unclean hands,” and consider when courts should—and shouldn’t—step in. With insights from Maia Aron, the case at the center of the episode set a powerful precedent that still echoes through modern business litigation today.

[Español] No tan rápido: el caso Day vs. Hydrologic

⭐ Invitada especial: la abogada Charles Garabedian [https://www.linkedin.com/in/charles-garabedian-79458059/] of Mark Migdal & Hayden ¿Qué pasa cuando un grupo de empleados decide comenzar de nuevo... y su antigua empresa les dice “no tan rápido”? En este episodio de Lawsome Sauce, exploramos el caso Day contra Hydrologic Distribution Company, una batalla legal por acuerdos de no competencia, secretos empresariales y la delgada línea entre la libertad profesional y la protección corporativa. Con la participación especial de Charles Garabedian de Mark, Migdal & Hayden, analizamos cómo la ley de Florida aborda los convenios restrictivos y qué nos enseña este caso sobre la importancia de la evidencia.

[Español] Amor, Esperanza y RICO: El arte de litigar los derechos

⭐ Invitada especial: la abogada Etan Mark [https://www.linkedin.com/in/etanmark/] of Mark Migdal & Hayden En este episodio del podcast Lawsome Sauce, exploramos un caso fascinante que conecta el arte icónico con complejas disputas legales. Michael McKenzie, editor de arte y colaborador del legendario Robert Indiana, demanda a Artists Rights Society y Morgan Art Foundation por apropiación indebida del copyright de la famosa escultura LOVE. Acompáñanos mientras analizamos las reclamaciones bajo la Ley Lanham, las acusaciones de crimen organizado bajo RICO y el concepto de causalidad próxima que resultó clave para la decisión judicial. Nuestro invitado especial, el abogado Etan Mark de Mark Migdal & Hayden, ofrece una visión experta sobre por qué los casos RICO rara vez prosperan en los tribunales. Una historia de derechos, licencias y cómo el arte se convierte en campo de batalla legal.   Esta traducción fue generada con apoyo de IA (ElevenLabs).