The strongest argument artists can make is that the unfettered advance of AI technologies that experts can neither understand nor control won’t greatly benefit humanity on balance — it’ll harm us. And for that reason, forcing artists to be complicit in the creation of those technologies is inflicting something terrible on them: moral injury. Moral injury is what happens when you feel you’ve been forced to violate your own values.
Source: The real argument artists should be making against AI
The Association of American Publishers filed an amicus brief on April 11 supporting authors in their class action lawsuit against Meta for copyright infringement related to AI training. The brief argues that Meta’s use of copyrighted works to train its LLaMA AI model fails to meet fair use standards and contradicts the company’s claims that licensing options for such content don’t exist.
A group of professors specializing in copyright law has filed an amicus brief in support of authors suing Meta for allegedly training models without permission. The brief, filed on Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division, calls Meta’s fair use defense “a breathtaking request for greater legal privileges than courts have ever granted human authors.”
Source: Law professors side with authors battling Meta in AI copyright case | TechCrunch
US performing rights organizations Ascap and BMI have filed their responses to the US Copyright Office’s recent notice of inquiry concerning the PROs sector. Both emphasize the fundamental importance these organizations play for songwriters, composers and music publishers; both suggest that the system is already heavily regulated and that additional regulation risks increasing the costs and burden for members; and both see bad faith in some of the ‘music users’ – licensors of music – whose concerns have sparked the inquiry.
Source: Ascap and BMI respond to US Copyright Office PROs inquiry
Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter (now X) and Square (now Block), sparked a weekend’s worth of debate around intellectual property, patents, and copyright, with a characteristically terse post declaring, “delete all IP law.” X’s current owner, Elon Musk, quickly replied, “I agree.” It’s not clear what exactly brought these comments on, but they come at a time when AI companies are facing numerous lawsuits alleging that they’ve violated copyright to train their models.
Source: Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk would like to ‘delete all IP law’ | TechCrunch
Late last month, Hollo, a conversational AI company, and Realbotix, which makes customizable humanoid robots, unveiled a version of the late actress. This synthetic twin is designed to mimic Suzanne Somers’ voice, personality and facial expressions. It’s loaded with a database of her performances. Alan Hamel, her widower and partner in buying and popularizing ThighMaster, claimed that they discussed this kind of idea before her death.
Source: Eternal Celebrities: The Multi-Billion Opportunity Coming
Embedding a social media post allows websites to share content without hosting the content themselves – but is such a tool a violation of copyright? A photographer wants the US Supreme Court to consider that question. In a petition for review filed on March 28, photographer Elliot McGucken is asking the court to consider if displaying a work without hosting the work using embedding tools violates copyright after lower courts dismissed the case.
Source: Does embedding an Instagram violate copyright? A photographer wants the Supreme Court to decide
The new bill is similar to last year’s, in that it effectively creates a right of publicity at the US federal level for the first time. The bill aims to reduce potential litigation by giving platforms featuring user-generated content (UGC) immunity if they quickly remove unauthorized deepfakes and notify the complainant once a deepfake has been removed. It also seeks to protect First Amendment rights by creating exemptions for such things as news reporting and satire.
Multiple years and twists later, the major labels’ copyright infringement lawsuit against the Internet Archive looks to be trending towards a resolution. That’s according to the litigants themselves, which just recently requested a 30-day stay in the case. The presiding judge promptly approved the sought pause, and as a result, we should know sooner rather than later whether the parties will finally put the matter to bed.
Source: Internet Archive, Major Labels ‘Optimistic’ About Lawsuit Settlement
Sens. Chris Coons, D-Del., and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., originally introduced the No Fakes Act in 2023, which would make it illegal to distribute a computer-generated likeness of a person without their consent. SAG-AFTRA, which represents 160,000 performers, and the Recording Industry Association of America have each made the bill a top priority, as they fear that artificial intelligence will lead to a deluge of impersonation.
Source: YouTube Endorses No Fakes Act, as Lawmakers Renew Push to Outlaw Unauthorized AI Clones