The lawsuits posing these questions are in early stages of litigation. If they don’t produce settlements (as most litigation does), it could be years until a Federal District Court rules on the matter. Those rulings would probably be appealed, and appellate decisions could vary by circuit, which could potentially elevate the question to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Rights
AI companies would be required to disclose copyrighted training data under new bill
The AI Foundation Model Transparency Act — filed by Reps. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and Don Beyer (D-VA) — would direct the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to work with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish rules for reporting training data transparency. Companies that make foundation models will be required to report sources of training data and how the data is retained during the inference process
Source: AI companies would be required to disclose copyrighted training data under new bill
How Much Does Spotify Pay Per Stream? — Let’s Ask Spotify
Spotify claims that the issues with payouts stem from three “drains on the royalty pool” that have reached a tipping point. To alleviate these drains — artificial streams, “bad actors” attempting to game the system with “noise” recordings, and small payments that aren’t reaching artists — Spotify’s new policies include charging labels and distributors per track when seemingly artificial streaming is detected and restructured monetization eligibility.
Source: How Much Does Spotify Pay Per Stream? — Let’s Ask Spotify
The Times Sues OpenAI and Microsoft Over A.I. Use of Copyrighted Work
The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement on Wednesday, opening a new front in the increasingly intense legal battle over the unauthorized use of published work to train artificial intelligence technologies. The lawsuit, filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan, contends that millions of articles published by The Times were used to train automated chatbots that now compete with the news outlet as a source of reliable information.
Source: The Times Sues OpenAI and Microsoft Over A.I. Use of Copyrighted Work
Why Google’s lobbying in California skyrocketed this year
The 30-second video ad struck an ominous tone, urging Californians to tell their lawmakers to vote against legislation that would force Google, Facebook and other large platforms to pay news publishers. The ad stated that it was “paid for” by the California Taxpayers Assn., a nonprofit advocacy group, but it really was bankrolled by Google.
Source: Why Google’s lobbying in California skyrocketed this year
AI cannot patent inventions, UK Supreme Court confirms
Technologist Dr Stephen Thaler had sought to have his AI, called Dabus, recognised as the inventor of a food container and a flashing light beacon. But in 2019, the intellectual property office (IPO) rejected this, saying only a person could be named as an inventor. Now five Supreme Court judges have dismissed a bid to reverse those decisions, concluding that “an inventor must be a person”, and that an AI cannot be named as an inventor to secure patent rights.
Source: AI cannot patent inventions, UK Supreme Court confirms
Authors and artificial intelligence: what next?
Although no plans for comprehensive regulation have yet been announced, the UK government is developing a code of practice to govern the use of copyrighted works by AI companies. AI capabilities are developing at a rapid pace and this constantly shifting landscape risks making any code of conduct redundant unless it is underpinned by high-level principles that are clear and stable.
Internet Archive Seeks Reversal in Book Scanning Suit
In a highly anticipated appeal brief, officials at the Internet Archive argued that district court judge John G. Koeltl misunderstood the facts and misapplied the law in finding that the IA’s scanning and lending of print library books infringed publishers’ copyrights, telling the U.S. Court of Appeals for Second Circuit the decision should be reversed.
Source: Internet Archive Seeks Reversal in Book Scanning Suit
Universal Music Takes Aim At Fake AI Tracks Fetching Thousands
Universal Music Group says fake AI ‘pre-release’ tracks are fetching between $5,000 and $30,000 apiece as part of elaborate scams. The Big Three label shed light upon the little-discussed and decidedly lucrative AI practice in a recent contribution to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Entitled “Artificial Intelligence in the Music Industry: Its Use by Pirates and Right Holders” and penned specifically by UMG VP of global content protection Graeme Grant.
Source: Universal Music Takes Aim At Fake AI Tracks Fetching Thousands
European Parliament Votes Not to Ban Geo-Blocking for Film and TV — For Now
The European Parliament on Wednesday followed the advice of its film and TV industry and did not ban geo-blocking for films and TV content across the European Union. Parliament instead opted to further assess the potential impact of a geo-blocking ban, which the audio-visual industry claims would destroy existing business models and result in billions in losses.
Source: European Parliament Votes Not to Ban Geo-Blocking for Film and TV — For Now