A lawsuit, filed by several publishers in 2024, accused Google of not doing enough to prevent piracy while simultaneously profiting from it. A recent success for Google led to the dismissal of the publishers’ vicarious liability claim, leaving a claim for contributory infringement to be decided. In a letter to the court on Thursday, counsel for Google requested a stay, pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Cox vs. Sony, and a “potentially dispositive” impact on the case.
Source: Google Says SCOTUS Decision in Cox vs. Sony Will Impact Publishers’ Lawsuit * TorrentFreak
Copyright law—a byzantine world in which millions ride on whether ‘Ice Ice Baby’ sounds too much like ‘Under Pressure’—rarely has much to say about geopolitics. But two pivotal AI copyright court decisions last week, the first in a slew of prominent lawsuits, will have enormous implications for the U.S. competition with China for technological primacy.
An important aspect of the Anthropic case is that it focuses on the inputs of AI systems as opposed to the outputs. In other words, it answers the question, “Is copying a whole bunch of books a violation, independent of what you’re doing with them?” with “No.”
Those using the platform can now indicate their interest in AI training licensing deals by marking songs as “Open to AI licensing.” The company explains that this selection registers rightsholders in a dedicated database, “creating a simple process for AI companies to seek authorization and legally license compositions and recordings from artists, labels, and publishers”.
The Danish government said on Thursday it would strengthen protection against digital imitations of people’s identities with what it believes to be the first law of its kind in Europe. It defines a deepfake as a very realistic digital representation of a person, including their appearance and voice. The Danish culture minister, Jakob Engel-Schmidt, said he hoped the bill before parliament would send an “unequivocal message” that everybody had the right to the way they looked and sounded.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide a copyright dispute between Cox Communications and a group of music labels following a judicial decision that threw out a $1 billion jury verdict against the internet service provider over alleged piracy of music by Cox customers. The justices took up Cox’s appeal of the lower court’s decision that it was still liable for copyright infringement by users of its internet service despite the decision to overturn the verdict.