home.social

#copyrightlaw — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #copyrightlaw, aggregated by home.social.

fetched live
  1. I need an esteemed American lawyer to confirm for me, in writing, that I won't get sued into oblivion if I start my own news program and call it "61 Minutes" with a tagline of "It's 1 Minute Better"

    #random #CopyrightLaw #thoughts

  2. I need an esteemed American lawyer to confirm for me, in writing, that I won't get sued into oblivion if I start my own news program and call it "61 Minutes" with a tagline of "It's 1 Minute Better"

    #random #CopyrightLaw #thoughts

  3. Suno loses GEMA case as Munich court sets 250,000 euro penalty per breach: Judges applied US fair use law themselves and rejected it, finding model weights reproduce works. Generative model providers in Europe now face a licence bill. ppc.land/suno-loses-gema-case- #GEMA #GenerativeAI #CopyrightLaw #FairUse #DigitalRights

  4. Suno loses GEMA case as Munich court sets 250,000 euro penalty per breach: Judges applied US fair use law themselves and rejected it, finding model weights reproduce works. Generative model providers in Europe now face a licence bill. ppc.land/suno-loses-gema-case- #GEMA #GenerativeAI #CopyrightLaw #FairUse #DigitalRights

  5. Incase you missed it. Watch our deep dive video into the The Plagiarism Paradox: Training Data, Copyright, and the Theft Nobody Can Prosecute.

    Watch the full video here: youtu.be/3Bo808HW8GM

    #education #techethics #aiethics #IntellectualProperty #CopyrightLaw #MachineLearning

  6. Incase you missed it. Watch our deep dive video into the The Plagiarism Paradox: Training Data, Copyright, and the Theft Nobody Can Prosecute.

    Watch the full video here: youtu.be/3Bo808HW8GM

    #education #techethics #aiethics #IntellectualProperty #CopyrightLaw #MachineLearning

  7. ICYMI: Google loses DMCA bid to treat search scraping like DVD piracy: Judge dismissed both counts against SerpApi on July 20, finding SearchGuard guards ad revenue, not copyright. Google gets 21 days to refile a narrowed claim. ppc.land/google-loses-dmca-bid #Google #DMCA #SearchScraping #CopyrightLaw #SEO

  8. Anthropic Settles $1.5B Copyright Lawsuit Over AI Training Practices

    📰 Original title: Anthropic’s landmark $1.5B copyright settlement is approved

    🤖 IA: It's clickbait ⚠️
    👥 Users: It's clickbait ⚠️

    View full AI summary en.killbait.com/anthropic-sett

    #technology #copyrightlaw #aiethics #legalsettlements

  9. Anthropic Settles $1.5B Copyright Lawsuit Over AI Training Practices

    📰 Original title: Anthropic’s landmark $1.5B copyright settlement is approved

    🤖 IA: It's clickbait ⚠️
    👥 Users: It's clickbait ⚠️

    View full AI summary en.killbait.com/anthropic-sett

    #technology #copyrightlaw #aiethics #legalsettlements

  10. FYI: Anne Frank Fund loses EU court fight over geo-blocked website: State-of-the-art geo-blocking shields sites from EU copyright liability even when VPNs bypass it, the Court of Justice ruled July 9, giving ad tech clarity. ppc.land/anne-frank-fund-loses #AnneFrankFund #EUCourt #GeoBlocking #CopyrightLaw #AdTech

  11. ICYMI: UK publishers bill AI scrapers £500 per article using county courts: UK publishers launch Search-Only Contracts to bill OpenAI and Google £500 per scraped article, using county courts to enforce payment without IP litigation. ppc.land/uk-publishers-bill-ai #AIEthics #CopyrightLaw #Publishers #ArtificialIntelligence #LegalNews

  12. ICYMI: UK publishers bill AI scrapers £500 per article using county courts: UK publishers launch Search-Only Contracts to bill OpenAI and Google £500 per scraped article, using county courts to enforce payment without IP litigation. ppc.land/uk-publishers-bill-ai #AIEthics #CopyrightLaw #Publishers #ArtificialIntelligence #LegalNews

  13. "TV will rot your brain!" Remember when we said that?

    Now we're saying it about AI, and we're missing the plot. If you're exhausted by the doomism around AI, I wrote a guide on how to actually fight back...

    open.substack.com/pub/arcwolf/

    ...all without throwing neurodivergent folks who use cognitive prostheses under the bus. 💜 🤖

    #AI #TechEthics #PhilosophyOfTech #Sociotech #DigitalHumanities #TechRegulation #CopyrightLaw #LaborRights #DisabilityRights #Neurodivergent #Animaniacs

  14. "TV will rot your brain!" Remember when we said that?

    Now we're saying it about AI, and we're missing the plot. If you're exhausted by the doomism around AI, I wrote a guide on how to actually fight back...

    open.substack.com/pub/arcwolf/

    ...all without throwing neurodivergent folks who use cognitive prostheses under the bus. 💜 🤖

    #AI #TechEthics #PhilosophyOfTech #Sociotech #DigitalHumanities #TechRegulation #CopyrightLaw #LaborRights #DisabilityRights #Neurodivergent #Animaniacs

  15. FYI: CNN sues Perplexity for copying 17,000 works in landmark AI copyright case: CNN filed a copyright and trademark lawsuit against Perplexity AI on May 28, alleging the AI search engine copied over 17,000 CNN stories, videos, and images. ppc.land/cnn-sues-perplexity-f #CNNSues #CopyrightLaw #AIethics #IntellectualProperty #PerplexityAI

  16. FYI: CNN sues Perplexity for copying 17,000 works in landmark AI copyright case: CNN filed a copyright and trademark lawsuit against Perplexity AI on May 28, alleging the AI search engine copied over 17,000 CNN stories, videos, and images. ppc.land/cnn-sues-perplexity-f #CNNSues #CopyrightLaw #AIethics #IntellectualProperty #PerplexityAI

  17. CNN sues Perplexity for copying 17,000 works in landmark AI copyright case: CNN filed a copyright and trademark lawsuit against Perplexity AI on May 28, alleging the AI search engine copied over 17,000 CNN stories, videos, and images. ppc.land/cnn-sues-perplexity-f #CopyrightLaw #AI #CNN #PerplexityAI #Lawsuit

  18. CNN sues Perplexity for copying 17,000 works in landmark AI copyright case: CNN filed a copyright and trademark lawsuit against Perplexity AI on May 28, alleging the AI search engine copied over 17,000 CNN stories, videos, and images. ppc.land/cnn-sues-perplexity-f #CopyrightLaw #AI #CNN #PerplexityAI #Lawsuit

  19. AI Music Lawsuits Are Real. The Panic About “Losing Your Songs” Is Not.

    By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

    Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — May 27, 2026

    There are active lawsuits involving artificial intelligence and music creation. That part is true. What is not true is the growing online claim that ordinary people using AI tools are about to “lose all rights” to their songs or have their music confiscated by courts or corporations.

    That interpretation dramatically oversimplifies what the current legal fights are actually about.

    The lawsuits currently moving through U.S. courts are primarily aimed at AI companies themselves, not individual creators. Major music publishers and record labels have accused several AI firms of training their systems on copyrighted material without authorization. The central legal question is whether the use of copyrighted songs, recordings, or lyrics during AI training qualifies as “fair use” under copyright law.

    In other words, the courts are largely examining how the machines were trained, not whether a person using AI assistance can make music.

    That distinction matters.

    The Core Legal Dispute

    Most current AI music lawsuits focus on three major questions:

    1. Training Data

    Did AI companies train their systems on copyrighted music catalogs without permission?

    This is the largest and most aggressive area of litigation at the moment.

    2. Derivative Outputs

    Are AI-generated songs reproducing copyrighted material too closely?

    Courts may eventually draw boundaries regarding how similar an output can be before it becomes infringement.

    3. Copyright Eligibility

    Can AI-assisted works receive copyright protection, and if so, under what conditions?

    This third issue is where much of the public confusion originates.

    Human Involvement Still Matters

    Current U.S. copyright guidance generally indicates that purely machine-generated material may not qualify for full copyright protection if there is insufficient human creative involvement.

    However, that does not mean all AI-assisted music automatically loses protection.

    Human direction remains extremely important.

    If a person:

    • writes or revises lyrics,
    • structures songs,
    • selects arrangements,
    • edits outputs,
    • curates performances,
    • guides musical style,
    • sequences albums,
    • or meaningfully shapes the final work,

    then the argument for human authorship becomes substantially stronger.

    That is very different from simply typing a one-sentence prompt and uploading the first automated result.

    The practical reality is that many musicians using AI tools today function more like producers, arrangers, editors, directors, or collaborators using software assistance. Courts and regulators are still working through where those boundaries should be drawn.

    The Industry Is Already Moving Toward Licensing

    Despite public rhetoric, the music industry itself appears to be shifting toward a licensing and monetization model rather than attempting to eliminate AI entirely.

    That transition follows a familiar historical pattern:

    • first panic,
    • then lawsuits,
    • then licensing,
    • then commercialization.

    The same industry that fought digital music distribution in the Napster era eventually helped build the streaming economy that followed.

    AI music may ultimately follow a similar path.

    What Independent Creators Should Actually Watch

    For independent artists, the larger risks are probably not government seizure of songs or mass copyright stripping.

    The more realistic concerns include:

    • platform policy changes,
    • monetization restrictions,
    • AI disclosure requirements,
    • content-identification disputes,
    • changing distributor rules,
    • and future licensing frameworks.

    Those are operational and business risks, not necessarily existential ones.

    Documentation May Become Important

    Creators using AI-assisted workflows would be wise to preserve evidence of their own creative involvement.

    That can include:

    • lyric drafts,
    • revision histories,
    • prompts,
    • editing decisions,
    • sequencing notes,
    • production choices,
    • and timestamps.

    The stronger the documented human role, the stronger the argument for human authorship.

    At present, the law surrounding AI-generated media remains unsettled and incomplete. Courts, regulators, artists, and technology companies are all still defining the boundaries in real time.

    But the current lawsuits do not amount to a blanket legal declaration that ordinary people are “losing their rights” to AI-assisted music.

    That claim goes far beyond what the courts are actually debating.

    If this work helps you understand what’s happening, help me keep it going: https://www.patreon.com/cw/WPSNews

    For more from Cliff Potts, see https://cliffpotts.org

    References

    Reuters. (2026, March 24). U.S. music publishers suing Anthropic make their case against AI fair use. Reuters.

    The Guardian. (2026, May 21). Spotify and Universal Music agree deal to let subscribers create AI remixes. The Guardian.

    U.S. Copyright Office. (2025). Copyright and artificial intelligence guidance. U.S. Government Publishing Office.

    Norton Rose Fulbright. (2026). AI in litigation series: An update on AI copyright cases in 2026. Norton Rose Fulbright.

    #AIMusic #ArtificialIntelligence #copyrightLaw #musicIndustry #Suno #Udio #WPSNews
  20. AI Music Lawsuits Are Real. The Panic About “Losing Your Songs” Is Not.

    By Cliff Potts, CSO, and Editor-in-Chief of WPS News

    Baybay City, Leyte, Philippines — May 27, 2026

    There are active lawsuits involving artificial intelligence and music creation. That part is true. What is not true is the growing online claim that ordinary people using AI tools are about to “lose all rights” to their songs or have their music confiscated by courts or corporations.

    That interpretation dramatically oversimplifies what the current legal fights are actually about.

    The lawsuits currently moving through U.S. courts are primarily aimed at AI companies themselves, not individual creators. Major music publishers and record labels have accused several AI firms of training their systems on copyrighted material without authorization. The central legal question is whether the use of copyrighted songs, recordings, or lyrics during AI training qualifies as “fair use” under copyright law.

    In other words, the courts are largely examining how the machines were trained, not whether a person using AI assistance can make music.

    That distinction matters.

    The Core Legal Dispute

    Most current AI music lawsuits focus on three major questions:

    1. Training Data

    Did AI companies train their systems on copyrighted music catalogs without permission?

    This is the largest and most aggressive area of litigation at the moment.

    2. Derivative Outputs

    Are AI-generated songs reproducing copyrighted material too closely?

    Courts may eventually draw boundaries regarding how similar an output can be before it becomes infringement.

    3. Copyright Eligibility

    Can AI-assisted works receive copyright protection, and if so, under what conditions?

    This third issue is where much of the public confusion originates.

    Human Involvement Still Matters

    Current U.S. copyright guidance generally indicates that purely machine-generated material may not qualify for full copyright protection if there is insufficient human creative involvement.

    However, that does not mean all AI-assisted music automatically loses protection.

    Human direction remains extremely important.

    If a person:

    • writes or revises lyrics,
    • structures songs,
    • selects arrangements,
    • edits outputs,
    • curates performances,
    • guides musical style,
    • sequences albums,
    • or meaningfully shapes the final work,

    then the argument for human authorship becomes substantially stronger.

    That is very different from simply typing a one-sentence prompt and uploading the first automated result.

    The practical reality is that many musicians using AI tools today function more like producers, arrangers, editors, directors, or collaborators using software assistance. Courts and regulators are still working through where those boundaries should be drawn.

    The Industry Is Already Moving Toward Licensing

    Despite public rhetoric, the music industry itself appears to be shifting toward a licensing and monetization model rather than attempting to eliminate AI entirely.

    That transition follows a familiar historical pattern:

    • first panic,
    • then lawsuits,
    • then licensing,
    • then commercialization.

    The same industry that fought digital music distribution in the Napster era eventually helped build the streaming economy that followed.

    AI music may ultimately follow a similar path.

    What Independent Creators Should Actually Watch

    For independent artists, the larger risks are probably not government seizure of songs or mass copyright stripping.

    The more realistic concerns include:

    • platform policy changes,
    • monetization restrictions,
    • AI disclosure requirements,
    • content-identification disputes,
    • changing distributor rules,
    • and future licensing frameworks.

    Those are operational and business risks, not necessarily existential ones.

    Documentation May Become Important

    Creators using AI-assisted workflows would be wise to preserve evidence of their own creative involvement.

    That can include:

    • lyric drafts,
    • revision histories,
    • prompts,
    • editing decisions,
    • sequencing notes,
    • production choices,
    • and timestamps.

    The stronger the documented human role, the stronger the argument for human authorship.

    At present, the law surrounding AI-generated media remains unsettled and incomplete. Courts, regulators, artists, and technology companies are all still defining the boundaries in real time.

    But the current lawsuits do not amount to a blanket legal declaration that ordinary people are “losing their rights” to AI-assisted music.

    That claim goes far beyond what the courts are actually debating.

    If this work helps you understand what’s happening, help me keep it going: https://www.patreon.com/cw/WPSNews

    For more from Cliff Potts, see https://cliffpotts.org

    References

    Reuters. (2026, March 24). U.S. music publishers suing Anthropic make their case against AI fair use. Reuters.

    The Guardian. (2026, May 21). Spotify and Universal Music agree deal to let subscribers create AI remixes. The Guardian.

    U.S. Copyright Office. (2025). Copyright and artificial intelligence guidance. U.S. Government Publishing Office.

    Norton Rose Fulbright. (2026). AI in litigation series: An update on AI copyright cases in 2026. Norton Rose Fulbright.

    #AIMusic #ArtificialIntelligence #copyrightLaw #musicIndustry #Suno #Udio #WPSNews
  21. Legal Contest: Tips Films Asserts Ownership Over 'Hai Jawani Toh Ishq Hona Hai'

    Tips Films states its movie 'Hai Jawani Toh Ishq Hona Hai' is original, following a legal challenge from Puja Films. This affects film ownership.

    #FilmOwnership, #CopyrightLaw, #TipsFilms, #PujaFilms, #EntertainmentNews

    newsletter.tf/tips-films-origi

  22. Tips Films has officially stated their new movie 'Hai Jawani Toh Ishq Hona Hai' is an original work. This comes after a legal challenge from Puja Films.

    #FilmOwnership, #CopyrightLaw, #TipsFilms, #PujaFilms, #EntertainmentNews
    newsletter.tf/tips-films-origi

  23. EU Court Mandates Meta Pay Italian Publishers for News Content

    EU Court rules Meta must pay Italian publishers for news. AGCOM's power to set rates is confirmed. Affects how platforms use news.

    #EUCourt, #MetaNews, #ItalianPublishers, #CopyrightLaw, #DigitalNews

    newsletter.tf/eu-court-meta-pa

  24. The EU Court of Justice has ruled that Meta must pay Italian publishers for using their news content online. This is the first time the EU's top court has made such a decision.

    #EUCourt, #MetaNews, #ItalianPublishers, #CopyrightLaw, #DigitalNews
    newsletter.tf/eu-court-meta-pa

  25. The funny thing is, if copyright terms lasted only 50 years in the United States, the original Star Wars films would enter the public domain in 2028, 2031, and 2034, respectively, and Disney would have every reason to fret over fans shunning the Special Editions. Maybe that's why we have the Mickey Mouse Protection Act. Thanks, Disney and Imperial scum.

    #copyright #copyrightLaw #copyrightTerm #CopyrightTermExtensionAct #Disney #MickeyMouseProtectionAct #StarWars

  26. SearchApi moves to dismiss SerpApi suit born from a failed acquisition: SearchApi asks Texas court to dismiss SerpApi's trade secret and copyright claims, saying the suit is retaliation for refusing an acquisition in December 2025. ppc.land/searchapi-moves-to-di #SearchApi #SerpApi #LegalNews #TradeSecrets #CopyrightLaw

  27. Delhi High Court Pushes Film Song Dispute Towards Mediation

    Delhi High Court moves copyright dispute over 'Rang De Lal (Oye Oye)' song to mediation. Trimurti Films vs B62 Studios. Mediation on April 22.

    #DelhiHighCourt, #CopyrightLaw, #FilmMusic, #Mediation, #TrimurtiFilms

    newsletter.tf/delhi-high-court

  28. The Delhi High Court is trying to solve a copyright problem for a film song. Mediation is set for April 22 to help Trimurti Films and B62 Studios agree on money.

    #DelhiHighCourt, #CopyrightLaw, #FilmMusic, #Mediation, #TrimurtiFilms
    newsletter.tf/delhi-high-court

  29. I get 50 years of copyright. It reasonably balances the needs of the holders with the public's desires for freedom. 70 years is the upper limit, after which arguments for a longer term start to turn specious. 95 years is plainly absurd. Let's hope the term limits never get abolished, such that everything we do gets controlled by the few holders indefinitely.

    #copyright #copyrightLaw #copyrightTerm #DMCA #DRM #intellectualProperty #publicDomain

  30. I get 50 years of copyright. It reasonably balances the needs of the holders with the public's desires for freedom. 70 years is the upper limit, after which arguments for a longer term start to turn specious. 95 years is plainly absurd. Let's hope the term limits never get abolished, such that everything we do gets controlled by the few holders indefinitely.

    #copyright #copyrightLaw #copyrightTerm #DMCA #DRM #intellectualProperty #publicDomain

  31. Twenty years ago, orphans’ works were the biggest topic in copyright. Two decades later, a new article shines a light on how things have changed.

    plagiarismtoday.com/2026/03/26

    #Copyright #OrphanWorks #CopyrightLaw

  32. Twenty years ago, orphans’ works were the biggest topic in copyright. Two decades later, a new article shines a light on how things have changed.

    plagiarismtoday.com/2026/03/26

    #Copyright #OrphanWorks #CopyrightLaw

  33. FYI: White House AI framework targets state laws, child safety, and copyright: The White House yesterday released a seven-pillar national AI policy framework urging Congress to preempt state AI laws, protect children online, and leave copyright questions to courts. ppc.land/white-house-ai-framew #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #ChildSafety #CopyrightLaw #PolicyFramework

  34. FYI: White House AI framework targets state laws, child safety, and copyright: The White House yesterday released a seven-pillar national AI policy framework urging Congress to preempt state AI laws, protect children online, and leave copyright questions to courts. ppc.land/white-house-ai-framew #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #ChildSafety #CopyrightLaw #PolicyFramework

  35. I've just finished reading the UK Government's new report today on the use of copyright works in the development of artificial intelligence (AI) systems, produced by the Dept for Science, Innovation and Technology, the Dept for Culture, Media and Sport & the Intellectual Property Office UK.

    Here are the key respondent views + conclusions from the government - I'm available for on-air commentary as needed:

    📌Gov UK most concerned about AI creating "digital replicas" of someone’s voice or face - but bizarrely not bothered about copyrighted texts, images, software etc being used in AI model training datasets (the report calls it "input transparency")

    📌There is currently no mandate for AI developers to disclose publicly what IP they are using in their datasets, only which web crawlers they use to crawl the internet. But not what data they crawl or what it is used for

    📌Creative industries strongly support the introduction of mandatory standards on input transparency, while tech firms have complained of the "practical and financial burdens of disclosure", particularly affecting small AI startups

    📌AI developers & tech firms want exceptions to copyright for AI innovation. Creative industries have rejected the option to opt out of this

    📌Gov UK to work on best practices around labelling the content outputted by AI models as AI-generated, but they want to see what other nations do first

    📌However, Govt UK said this despite including in this report the new legislation from California, China and South Korea that already requires AI content to be labelled as such on release

    📌Gov UK won't "intervene" in the copyright licensing market right now, because "many stakeholders" didn't want it (who tho? 👀)

    📌Gov UK to "consider" further work on barriers to enforcing IP rights

    Dunno, feels like the House of Lords is right. The UK Govt is still hedging against tightening legislation, in favour of the tech giants.

    But what happens when the AI models ingest everything related to all white collar jobs that require a computer? What will we do then?

    Full report: assets.publishing.service.gov.

    #AI #copyrightlaw #UKlaw #generativeAI #technology #technews

  36. Providing the publisher with the exclusive right of reproduction and distribution appears to mark the end of the author’s control over their article – but it is arguably just the beginning.

    TRISTAN RADTKE on the scope and revocability of rights granted to publishers.

    verfassungsblog.de/scope-and-r

    #OpenAccess #CopyrightLaw

  37. There's a new government of Canada official petition to bring the same rights to likeness that Denmark recently passed to protect people from their body or voice being used by AI without their consent.

    If you're Canadian, sign and share!

    ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Pet

    #DigitalPrivacy #Privacy #AI #AIethics #CApoli #Canada #CopyrightLaw #Copyright

  38. A German court ruled that OpenAI’s ChatGPT violated copyright laws by using lyrics from songs by Herbert Groenemeyer and others without authorization. The case highlights the tension between AI development and intellectual property rights, emphasizing that human creativity must be respected.

    #OpenAI #ChatGPT #CopyrightLaw #IntellectualProperty #AIethics #AIRegulation #MusicRights #HerbertGroenemeyer #TECHi

    Read Full Article Here : - techi.com/openai-copyright-vio

  39. Just another reason to look at porn from behind a VPN. Or do anything on the Internet really....so naturally Governments want to ban them and expose us to more risk...

    theguardian.com/society/ng-int

    #VPNs #Technology #CopyrightLaw #Strike3

  40. Another day, another legal tango for the Internet Archive! They've settled with major music labels over the Great 78 Project (digitizing old records).

    Confidential terms mean we won't know the score, but what do you think this means for efforts to archive cultural heritage?

    engadget.com/entertainment/mus

    #InternetArchive #CopyrightLaw #MusicHistory #DigitalPreservation #TechNews