Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali: Lo, Pei-Chi, Lu, Thomas Y.
Natura: Preprint
Pubblicazione: 2026
Soggetti:
Accesso online:https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.09459
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
_version_ 1866912824011259904
author Lo, Pei-Chi
Lu, Thomas Y.
author_facet Lo, Pei-Chi
Lu, Thomas Y.
contents Judicial reasoning in copyright damage awards poses a core challenge for computational legal analysis. Although federal courts follow the 1976 Copyright Act, their interpretations and factor weightings vary widely across jurisdictions. This inconsistency creates unpredictability for litigants and obscures the empirical basis of legal decisions. This research introduces a novel discourse-based Large Language Model (LLM) methodology that integrates Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) with an agentic workflow to extract and quantify previously opaque reasoning patterns from judicial opinions. Our framework addresses a major gap in empirical legal scholarship by parsing opinions into hierarchical discourse structures and using a three-stage pipeline, i.e., Dataset Construction, Discourse Analysis, and Agentic Feature Extraction. This pipeline identifies reasoning components and extract feature labels with corresponding discourse subtrees. In analyzing copyright damage rulings, we show that discourse-augmented LLM analysis outperforms traditional methods while uncovering unquantified variations in factor weighting across circuits. These findings offer both methodological advances in computational legal analysis and practical insights into judicial reasoning, with implications for legal practitioners seeking predictive tools, scholars studying legal principle application, and policymakers confronting inconsistencies in copyright law.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2601_09459
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Dissecting Judicial Reasoning in U.S. Copyright Damage Awards
Lo, Pei-Chi
Lu, Thomas Y.
Information Retrieval
Computation and Language
Judicial reasoning in copyright damage awards poses a core challenge for computational legal analysis. Although federal courts follow the 1976 Copyright Act, their interpretations and factor weightings vary widely across jurisdictions. This inconsistency creates unpredictability for litigants and obscures the empirical basis of legal decisions. This research introduces a novel discourse-based Large Language Model (LLM) methodology that integrates Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) with an agentic workflow to extract and quantify previously opaque reasoning patterns from judicial opinions. Our framework addresses a major gap in empirical legal scholarship by parsing opinions into hierarchical discourse structures and using a three-stage pipeline, i.e., Dataset Construction, Discourse Analysis, and Agentic Feature Extraction. This pipeline identifies reasoning components and extract feature labels with corresponding discourse subtrees. In analyzing copyright damage rulings, we show that discourse-augmented LLM analysis outperforms traditional methods while uncovering unquantified variations in factor weighting across circuits. These findings offer both methodological advances in computational legal analysis and practical insights into judicial reasoning, with implications for legal practitioners seeking predictive tools, scholars studying legal principle application, and policymakers confronting inconsistencies in copyright law.
title Dissecting Judicial Reasoning in U.S. Copyright Damage Awards
topic Information Retrieval
Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.09459