---
id: "entity-meta-d2"
type: "entity"
source_timestamps: ["¶4", "¶6", "¶14"]
tags: ["gen-ai-company", "defendant"]
related: ["entity-judge-vincent-chhabria", "concept-shadow-libraries"]
entityType: "organization"
canonicalName: "Meta"
aliases: ["Meta Platforms", "\\\"Meta Platforms", "Inc.\\\"", "Facebook"]
canonical_url: "meta.com"
sources: ["tail2"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-tail2"
originDay: 2
articleStem: "hbr-tail-126-genai-copyright"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2025/07/can-gen-ai-and-copyright-coexist"
sourceTitle: "Can Gen AI and Copyright Coexist?"
---
# Meta

A major technology company (Facebook, Instagram, and the Llama AI models) and the defendant in *Kadrey v. Meta* (N.D. Cal.), a suit brought by 13 authors.

[[entity-judge-vincent-chhabria]] ruled in a way skeptical of Meta's fair-use position, emphasizing market harm as the decisive factor (see [[concept-fair-use-divergence]], [[quote-chhabria-competing]]). Discovery reportedly revealed Meta used at least **82 Terabytes** of pirated book data (including shadow-library sources such as Books3) — see [[concept-shadow-libraries]].

**Enrichment note:** Legal analysis indicates Chhabria's disposition stressed that fair use is fact-specific and rejected an *automatic* licensing entitlement absent proven market harm; the exact "82 TB" figure originates in complaint allegations/technical documentation rather than a judicial finding, so treat it as an allegation.