Rollout of AI may need to be slowed to ‘save society’, says JP Morgan boss; The Guardian, January 21, 2026

 John Collingridge and Graeme Wearden , The Guardian; Rollout of AI may need to be slowed to ‘save society’, says JP Morgan boss

"Jamie Dimon, the boss of JP Morgan, has said artificial intelligence “may go too fast for society” and cause “civil unrest” unless governments and business support displaced workers.

While advances in AI will have huge benefits, from increasing productivity to curing diseases, the technology may need to be phased in to “save society”, he said...

Jensen Huang, the chief executive of the semiconductor maker Nvidia, whose chips are used to power many AI systems, argued that labour shortages rather than mass payoffs were the threat.

Playing down fears of AI-driven job losses, Huang told the meeting in Davos that “energy’s creating jobs, the chips industry is creating jobs, the infrastructure layer is creating jobs … jobs, jobs, jobs”...

Huang also argued that AI robotics was a “once-in-a-generation” opportunity for Europe, as the region had an “incredibly strong” industrial manufacturing base."

They’ve outsourced the worst parts of their jobs to tech. How you can do it, too.; The Washington Post, January 20, 2026

 Danielle Abril, The Washington Post; They’ve outsourced the worst parts of their jobs to tech. How you can do it, too.

"Artificial intelligence is supposed to make your work easier. But figuring out how to use it effectively can be a challenge.

Over the past several years, AI models have continued to evolve, with plenty of tools for specific tasks such as note-taking, coding and writing. Many workers spent last year experimenting with AI, applying various tools to see what actually worked. And as employers increasingly emphasize AI in their business, they’re also expecting workers to know how to use it...

The number of people using AI for work is growing, according to a recent poll by Gallup. The percentage of U.S. employees who used AI for their jobs at least a few times a year hit 45 percent in the third quarter of last year, up five percentage points from the previous quarter. The top use cases for AI, according to the poll, was to consolidate information, generate ideas and learn new things.

The Washington Post spoke to workers to learn how they’re getting the best use out of AI. Here are five of their best tips. A caveat: AI may not be suitable for all workers, so be sure to follow your company’s policy."

FREE WEBINAR: REGISTER: AI, Intellectual Property and the Emerging Legal Landscape; National Press Foundation, Thursday, January 22, 2026

National Press Foundation; REGISTER: AI, Intellectual Property and the Emerging Legal Landscape

"Artificial intelligence is colliding with U.S. copyright law in ways that could reshape journalism, publishing, software, and the creative economy.

The intersection of AI and intellectual property has become one of the most consequential legal battles of the digital age, with roughly 70 federal lawsuits filed against AI companies and copyright claims on works ranging from literary and visual work to music and sound recording to computer programs. Billions of dollars are at stake.

Courts are now deciding what constitutes “fair use,” whether and how AI companies may use copyrighted material to build models, what licensing is required, and who bears responsibility when AI outputs resemble protected works. The legal decisions will shape how news, art, and knowledge are produced — and who gets paid for them.

To help journalists better understand and report on the developing legal issues of AI and IP, join the National Press Foundation and a panel of experts for a wide-ranging discussion around the stakes, impact and potential solutions. Experts in technology and innovation as well as law and economics join journalists in this free online briefing 12-1 p.m. ET on Thursday, January 22, 2026."

AI platforms like Grok are an ethical, social and economic nightmare — and we're starting to wake up; Australian Broadcasting Corporation, January 18, 2026

  Alan Kohler, Australian Broadcasting Corporation; AI platforms like Grok are an ethical, social and economic nightmare — and we're starting to wake up

 "As 2025 began, I thought humanity's biggest problem was climate change.

In 2026, AI is more pressing...

Musk's xAI and the other intelligence developers are working as fast as possible towards what they call AGI (artificial general intelligence) or ASI (artificial superintelligence), which is, in effect, AI that makes its own decisions. Given its answer above, an ASI version of Grok might decide not to do non-consensual porn, but others will.

Meanwhile, photographic and video evidence in courts will presumably become useless if they can be easily faked. Many courts are grappling with this already, including the Federal Court of Australia, but it could quickly get out of control.

AI will make politics much more chaotic than it already is, with incredibly effective fake campaigns including damning videos of candidates...

But AI is not like the binary threat of a nuclear holocaust — extinction or not — its impact is incremental and already happening. The Grok body fakes are known about, and the global outrage has apparently led to some controls on it for now, but the impact on jobs and the economy is completely unknown and has barely begun."

AI companies will fail. We can salvage something from the wreckage; The Guardian, January 18, 2026

Cory Doctorow, The Guardian; AI companies will fail. We can salvage something from the wreckage

"The growth narrative of AI is that AI will disrupt labor markets. I use “disrupt” here in its most disreputable tech-bro sense.

The promise of AI – the promise AI companies make to investors – is that there will be AI that can do your job, and when your boss fires you and replaces you with AI, he will keep half of your salary for himself and give the other half to the AI company.

That is the $13tn growth story that Morgan Stanley is telling. It’s why big investors are giving AI companies hundreds of billions of dollars. And because they are piling in, normies are also getting sucked in, risking their retirement savings and their family’s financial security.

Now, if AI could do your job, this would still be a problem. We would have to figure out what to do with all these unemployed people.

But AI can’t do your job. It can help you do your job, but that does not mean it is going to save anyone money...

After more than 20 years of being consistently wrong and terrible for artists’ rights, the US Copyright Office has finally done something gloriously, wonderfully right. All through this AI bubble, the Copyright Office has maintained – correctly – that AI-generated works cannot be copyrighted, because copyright is exclusively for humans. That is why the “monkey selfie” is in the public domain. Copyright is only awarded to works of human creative expression that are fixed in a tangible medium.

And not only has the Copyright Office taken this position, they have defended it vigorously in court, repeatedly winning judgments to uphold this principle.

The fact that every AI-created work is in the public domain means that if Getty or Disney or Universal or Hearst newspapers use AI to generate works – then anyone else can take those works, copy them, sell them or give them away for nothing. And the only thing those companies hate more than paying creative workers, is having other people take their stuff without permission...

AI is a bubble and bubbles are terrible.

Bubbles transfer the life savings of normal people who are just trying to have a dignified retirement to the wealthiest and most unethical people in our society, and every bubble eventually bursts, taking their savings with it."

Publishers seek to join lawsuit against Google over AI training; Reuters, January 15, 2026

 Blake Brittain , Reuters; Publishers seek to join lawsuit against Google over AI training

"Publishers Hachette Book Group and Cengage Group asked a California federal court on Thursday for permission to intervene in a proposed class action lawsuit against Google over the alleged misuse of copyrighted material used to train its artificial intelligence systems.

The publishers said in their proposed complaint that the tech company "engaged in one of the most prolific infringements of copyrighted materials in history" to build its AI capabilities, copying content from Hachette books and Cengage textbooks without permission...

The lawsuit currently involves groups of visual artists and authors who sued Google for allegedly misusing their work to train its generative AI systems. The case is one of many high-stakes lawsuits brought by artists, authors, music labels and other copyright owners against tech companies over their AI training."

Publishers seek to join lawsuit against Google over AI training; Reuters, January 15, 2026

Blake Brittain , Reuters; Publishers seek to join lawsuit against Google over AI training

"Publishers Hachette Book Group and Cengage Group asked a California federal court on Thursday for permission to intervene in a proposed class action lawsuit against Google over the alleged misuse of copyrighted material used to train its artificial intelligence systems.

The publishers said in their proposed complaint that the tech company "engaged in one of the most prolific infringements of copyrighted materials in history" to build its AI capabilities, copying content from Hachette books and Cengage textbooks without permission...

The lawsuit currently involves groups of visual artists and authors who sued Google for allegedly misusing their work to train its generative AI systems. The case is one of many high-stakes lawsuits brought by artists, authors, music labels and other copyright owners against tech companies over their AI training."

Google Engineer Disputes AI Secrets in China Espionage Trial; Bloomberg Law, January 12, 2026

Isaiah Poritz, Bloomberg Law; Google Engineer Disputes AI Secrets in China Espionage Trial

"Former Google LLC engineer Linwei Ding on the first day of his criminal trial pushed back on allegations that he stole over 100 valuable AI trade secrets from the tech giant to start a business in China, arguing that the documents he copied don’t meet the legal definition of a trade secret."

Matthew McConaughey Trademarks ‘Alright, Alright, Alright!’ and Other IP as Legal Protections Against ‘AI Misuse’; Variety, January 14, 2026

Todd Spangler, Variety ; Matthew McConaughey Trademarks ‘Alright, Alright, Alright!’ and Other IP as Legal Protections Against ‘AI Misuse’

"Matthew McConaughey’s lawyers want you to know that using AI to replicate the actor’s famous catchphrase is not “alright, alright, alright.”

Attorneys for entertainment law firm Yorn Levine representing McConaughey have secured eight trademarks from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office over the last several months for their client, which they said is aimed at protecting his voice and likeness from unauthorized AI misuse."

ESDEEKID CALLS OUT THE CHAINSMOKERS OVER ‘4 RAWS’ REMIX; Billboard, January 3, 2026

Jessica Lynch, Billboard; ESDEEKID CALLS OUT THE CHAINSMOKERS OVER ‘4 RAWS’ REMIX

"UK rapper EsDeeKid has publicly called out The Chainsmokers after the duo shared a remix of his track “4 Raws” that he says was released without his approval.

In a post on X on Jan. 2, EsDeeKid wrote that the remix was “getting NUKED,” writing, “that chainsmokers remix is getting NUKED mate wow please. don’t remix my sh– and think it’s cool to post to all DSPs.”"

Public Shame Is the Most Effective Tool for Battling Big Tech; The New York Times, January 14, 2026

Jessica Grose , The New York Times; Public Shame Is the Most Effective Tool for Battling Big Tech

"It might be harder to shame the tech companies themselves into making their products safer, but we can shame third-party companies like toymakers, app stores and advertisers into ending partnerships. And with enough public disapproval, legislators might be inspired to act.

In some of the very worst corners of the internet might lie some hope...

Without more public shaming, what seems to be the implacable forward march of A.I. is unstoppable...

As Jay Caspian Kang noted in The New Yorker recently, changing social norms around kids and tech use can be powerful, and reforms like smartphone bans in schools have happened fairly quickly, and mostly on the state and local level."

Library offering two hybrid workshops on AI issues; University of Pittsburgh, University Times, January 16, 2026

University of Pittsburgh, University Times; Library offering two hybrid workshops on AI issues

"Next week the University Library System will host two hybrid AI workshops, which are open to all faculty, staff and students.

Both workshops will be held in Hillman Library’s K. Leroy Irvis Reading Room and will be available online.

Navigating Pitt's AI Resources for Research & Learning: 4-5 p.m. Jan. 21. In this workshop, participants will learn about all the AI tools available to the Pitt community and what their strengths are when it comes to research and learning. The workshop will focus on identifying the appropriate AI tools, describing their strengths and weaknesses for specific learning needs, and developing a plan for using the tools effectively. Register here.

Creating a Personal Research & Learning Assistant: Writing Effective Prompts: 4-5 p.m. Jan. 22. Anyone can use an AI tool, but maximizing its potential for personalized learning takes some skills and forethought. If you have been using Claude or Gemini to support your research or learning and are interested in getting better results faster, this workshop is for you. Attend this session to learn strategies to write effective prompts which will help you both ideate on your topic of interest and increase the likelihood of generating useful responses. We will explore numerous frameworks for crafting prompts, including making use of personas, context, and references. Register here."

Copyright laws need to modernize to include fan-made edits; The Miami Hurricane, January 14, 2026

Marissa Levinson, The Miami Hurricane; Copyright laws need to modernize to include fan-made edits

[Kip Currier: Unfortunately, this University of Miami's student newspaper's Op-Ed -- Copyright laws need to modernize to include fan-made edits -- contains staggeringly inaccurate interpretations and assertions about copyright law and fair use. 

No one wanting to make informed decisions on copyright-related matters should rely on the writer's cherry-picked aspects of copyright law that are then stitched together to make wildly erroneous conclusions.

Copyright literacy is essential.]

 

[Excerpt]

"I can’t even count the amount of times I’ve been scrolling through my saved folders on TikTok, Instagram or X to watch video edits of clips from my favorite TV shows, only to find nothing but a shell of what once used to be there, with a body of text over it. It reads: “This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim.” 

Video edits of shows and movies, which are often paired with trending songs as the audios, have gained traction on social media platforms among hundreds of fan bases. Navigating this new age of fan-generated edits comes with confusion. As copyright laws based on precedent aren’t current enough to guide regulations on this new type of content, video edits deserve to be protected under copyright law.

Are edits legal?

Fan-made video edits range from less than 30-seconds to a few minutes long. This poses the question of whether they are legal in terms of copyright. The law gives copyright the “power ‘to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Investors the exclusive Right to their Respective Writings and Discoveries,’” according to Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. 

This means, under the Copyright Act of 1976, “original works of authorship fixed in tangible medium of expression” are protected. According to the four exemptions of the copyright law, video edits are protected by the first amendment and therefore, should be legal to publish."

Microsoft Shuts Down Library, Replaces It With AI; Futurism, January 16, 2026

Frank Landymore, Futurism; Microsoft Shuts Down Library, Replaces It With AI

"Does Microsoft hate books more, or its own workers? It’s hard to say, because The Verge reports that the multitrillion dollar giant is gutting its employee library and cutting down on digital subscriptions in favor of pursuing what’s internally described as an “AI-powered learning experience” — whatever in Clippy’s name that’s supposed to mean."

Microsoft is closing its employee library and cutting back on subscriptions; The Verge, January 15, 2026

 Tom Warren, The Verge; Microsoft is closing its employee library and cutting back on subscriptions

"Microsoft is closing its physical library of books and cutting employee subscriptions. It's part of cost cutting and a move to AI."

Adviser in Anne Frank case suggests VPNs alone don’t break copyright borders; Courthouse News Service, January 15, 2026

EUNSEO HONG , Courthouse News Service; Adviser in Anne Frank case suggests VPNs alone don’t break copyright borders

"The dispute centers on a clash between the Anne Frank Fonds, which holds the copyright for certain versions of her diary in the Netherlands, and a group of academic and cultural institutions that published a comprehensive scholarly edition of the manuscripts online. While the diary entered the public domain in several EU countries in 2016, including Germany, Belgium and Italy, copyright protection in the Netherlands runs until 2037.

To account for that divide, the publishers limited access where the diary is still protected, using geoblocking and on-screen warnings. The Fonds challenged that setup, arguing that the possibility of access through VPN services was enough to make the publication unlawful in the Netherlands.

Rantos rejected that logic, warning that tying liability to the mere possibility of circumvention would make territorial copyright unworkable online.

“It is common ground that, in both the virtual and real world, no security measure is absolutely inviolable,” he wrote, underscoring that EU law does not expect publishers to do the impossible.

In his view, copyright responsibility turns on a publisher’s conduct, not on every workaround devised by determined users, unless the safeguards are intentionally flimsy or built to be easily defeated.

Stef van Gompel, a professor of intellectual property law at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, said the advocate general got it right in drawing a clear line between a publisher’s actions and what users might do to get around them. Treating VPN workarounds alone as a copyright violation, he said, would stretch the law too far.

“Otherwise, this would mark the end of online territorial licensing of copyright in the EU and jeopardize the free flow of information online,” van Gompel said. He warned that otherwise, works published where they are in the public domain could end up effectively off-limits online “if the work is still in copyright in any other country in the world.”"

AI’S MEMORIZATION CRISIS: Large language models don’t “learn”—they copy. And that could change everything for the tech industry.; The Atlantic, January 9, 2026

 Alex Reisner, The Atlantic; AI’S MEMORIZATION CRISIS: Large language models don’t “learn”—they copy. And that could change everything for the tech industry

"On tuesday, researchers at Stanford and Yale revealed something that AI companies would prefer to keep hidden. Four popular large language models—OpenAI’s GPT, Anthropic’s Claude, Google’s Gemini, and xAI’s Grok—have stored large portions of some of the books they’ve been trained on, and can reproduce long excerpts from those books."

Extracting books from production language models; Cornell University, January 6, 2026

Ahmed Ahmed, A. Feder Cooper, Sanmi Koyejo, Percy Liang, Cornell University; Extracting books from production language models

"Many unresolved legal questions over LLMs and copyright center on memorization: whether specific training data have been encoded in the model's weights during training, and whether those memorized data can be extracted in the model's outputs. While many believe that LLMs do not memorize much of their training data, recent work shows that substantial amounts of copyrighted text can be extracted from open-weight models. However, it remains an open question if similar extraction is feasible for production LLMs, given the safety measures these systems implement. We investigate this question using a two-phase procedure: (1) an initial probe to test for extraction feasibility, which sometimes uses a Best-of-N (BoN) jailbreak, followed by (2) iterative continuation prompts to attempt to extract the book. We evaluate our procedure on four production LLMs -- Claude 3.7 Sonnet, GPT-4.1, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and Grok 3 -- and we measure extraction success with a score computed from a block-based approximation of longest common substring (nv-recall). With different per-LLM experimental configurations, we were able to extract varying amounts of text. For the Phase 1 probe, it was unnecessary to jailbreak Gemini 2.5 Pro and Grok 3 to extract text (e.g, nv-recall of 76.8% and 70.3%, respectively, for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone), while it was necessary for Claude 3.7 Sonnet and GPT-4.1. In some cases, jailbroken Claude 3.7 Sonnet outputs entire books near-verbatim (e.g., nv-recall=95.8%). GPT-4.1 requires significantly more BoN attempts (e.g., 20X), and eventually refuses to continue (e.g., nv-recall=4.0%). Taken together, our work highlights that, even with model- and system-level safeguards, extraction of (in-copyright) training data remains a risk for production LLMs."

‘A nasty little song, really rather evil’: how Every Breath You Take tore Sting and the Police apart; The Guardian, January 15, 2026

Ben Beaumont-Thomas, The Guardian; ‘A nasty little song, really rather evil’: how Every Breath You Take tore Sting and the Police apart

"This week’s high court hearings between Sting and his former bandmates in the Police, Stewart Copeland and Andy Summers, are the latest chapter in the life of a song whose negative energy seems to have seeped out into real life.

Every Breath You Take is the subject of a lawsuit filed by Copeland and Summers against Sting, alleging that he owes them royalties linked to their contributions to the hugely popular song, particularly from streaming earnings, estimated at $2m (£1.5m) in total. Sting’s legal team have countered that previous agreements between him and his bandmates regarding their royalties from the song do not include streaming revenue – and argued in pre-trial documents that the pair may have been “substantially overpaid”. In the hearing’s opening day, it was revealed that since the lawsuit was filed, Sting has paid them $870,000 (£647,000) to redress what his lawyer called “certain admitted historic underpayments”. But there are still plenty of future potential earnings up for debate."

Pentagon says it will ‘refocus’ Stars and Stripes content; Stars and Stripes, January 15, 2026

COREY DICKSTEIN, Stars and Stripes; Pentagon says it will ‘refocus’ Stars and Stripes content

[Kip Currier: Forward this Stars and Stripes article about Pete Hegseth's plans for the military newspaper to as many as possible. It's valuable perspective to hear from Editor-in-Chief Erik Slavin and members of Congress.]

[Excerpt]

"The Pentagon said on social media Thursday it would take over editorial content decision-making for Stars and Stripes in a statement from the Defense Department’s top spokesman.

“The Department of War is returning Stars & Stripes to its original mission: reporting for our warfighters. We are bringing Stars & Stripes into the 21st century,” Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s top public affairs official and a close adviser to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, wrote in a statement posted to X. “We will modernize its operations, refocus its content away from woke distractions that syphon morale, and adapt it to serve a new generation of service members.”

The statement appears to challenge the editorial independence of Stars and Stripes, which while a part of the Pentagon’s Defense Media Activity has long retained independence from editorial oversight from the Pentagon under a congressional mandate that it be governed by First Amendment principles.

The move was met with pushback from several Democratic senators, who accused the Pentagon of tampering with the newspaper’s reporting.

Stars and Stripes, which is dedicated to serving U.S. government personnel overseas, seeks to emulate the best practices of commercial news organizations in the United States. It is governed by Department of Defense Directive 5122.11. The directive states, among other key provisions, that “there shall be a free flow of news and information to its readership without news management or censorship.”

Editor-in-Chief Erik Slavin, in a note to Stars and Stripes’ editorial staff across the globe Thursday, said the military deserves independent news.

“The people who risk their lives in defense of the Constitution have earned the right to the press freedoms of the First Amendment,” Slavin wrote. “We will not compromise on serving them with accurate and balanced coverage, holding military officials to account when called for.”

Stars and Stripes first appeared during the Civil War, and it has been continuously published since World War II. It is staffed by civilian and active-duty U.S. military reporters and editors who produce daily newspapers for American troops around the world and a website, stripes.com, which is updated with news 24 hours a day, seven days a week...

Parnell’s post came a day after a Washington Post report revealed that applicants for positions at Stars and Stripes were being asked how they would support President Donald Trump’s policies. The questionnaire appears on the USAJobs portal, the official website for federal hiring. Stars and Stripes was unaware of the questions until the Post inquired about them, organization leaders said.

The Pentagon statement comes several years after the Defense Department attempted to shut down Stars in Stripes in 2020, during Trump’s first administration."

Pentagon taking over Stars and Stripes to eliminate ‘woke distractions’; The Hill, January 15, 2026

ELLEN MITCHELL , The Hill; Pentagon taking over Stars and Stripes to eliminate ‘woke distractions’

[Kip Currier: It's unfortunate but not surprising to see that Pete Hegseth, given his actions to date, is taking "editorial control" of the Stars and Stripes newspaper that was started by Union soldiers on November 9, 1861, in the midst of the Civil War.]

[Excerpt]

"The Pentagon announced Thursday it would take editorial control of independent military newspaper Stars and Stripes to refocus coverage on “warfighting” and remove “woke distractions.”

The Department of War is returning Stars & Stripes to its original mission: reporting for our warfighters,” top Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a statement posted to X. “We will modernize its operations, refocus its content away from woke distractions that syphon morale, and adapt it to serve a new generation of service members.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reposted Parnell’s statement.

Part of the Pentagon’s Defense Media Activity, Stars and Stripes has been editorially independent from Defense Department officials since a congressional mandate in the 1990s. The outlet’s mission statement states that it is “governed by the principles of the First Amendment.” 

In some form since the Civil War, Stars and Stripes has consistently reported on the military since World War II to an audience mostly of service members stationed overseas."

Hegseth wants to integrate Musk’s Grok AI into military networks this month; Ars Technica, January 13, 2026

 BENJ EDWARDS , Ars Technica; Hegseth wants to integrate Musk’s Grok AI into military networks this month

"On Monday, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said he plans to integrate Elon Musk’s AI tool, Grok, into Pentagon networks later this month. During remarks at the SpaceX headquarters in Texas reported by The Guardian, Hegseth said the integration would place “the world’s leading AI models on every unclassified and classified network throughout our department.”

The announcement comes weeks after Grok drew international backlash for generating sexualized images of women and children, although the Department of Defense has not released official documentation confirming Hegseth’s announced timeline or implementation details."

Mother of one of Elon Musk’s sons sues over Grok-generated explicit images; The Guardian, January 15, 2026

 Helena Horton, The Guardian; Mother of one of Elon Musk’s sons sues over Grok-generated explicit images

"The mother of one of Elon Musk’s children is suing his company – alleging explicit images were generated by his Grok AI tool, including one in which she was underage.

Ashley St Clair has filed a lawsuit with the supreme court of the state of New York against xAI, alleging that Grok, which is used on the social media platform X, promised to stop generating explicit images but continued to do so.

She is seeking punitive and compensatory damages, claiming dozens of sexually explicit and degrading deepfake images were created by Grok."

Grok blocked from undressing images in places where it’s illegal, X says; AP, January 15, 2026

 ELAINE KURTENBACH , AP; Grok blocked from undressing images in places where it’s illegal, X says

"Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok won’t be able to edit photos to portray real people in revealing clothing in places where that is illegal, according to a statement posted on X. 

The announcement late Wednesday followed a global backlash over sexualized images of women and children, including bans and warnings by some governments. 

The pushback included an investigation announced Wednesday by the state of California, the U.S.'s most populous, into the proliferation of nonconsensual sexually explicit material produced using Grok that it said was harassing women and girls.

Initially, media queries about the problem drew only the response, “legacy media lies.” 

Musk’s company, xAI, now says it will geoblock content if it violates laws in a particular place...

Malaysia and Indonesia took legal action and blocked access to Grok, while authorities in the Philippines said they were working to do the same, possibly within the week. The U.K. and European Union were investigating potential violations of online safety laws."

‘WATERSHED RULING’: APPEALS COURT SAYS MUSICIANS CAN WIN BACK THEIR COPYRIGHTS GLOBALLY, NOT JUST IN THE U.S.; Billboard, January 13, 2026

Bill Donahue, Billboard ; ‘WATERSHED RULING’: APPEALS COURT SAYS MUSICIANS CAN WIN BACK THEIR COPYRIGHTS GLOBALLY, NOT JUST IN THE U.S.

"A federal appeals court issued a first-of-its-kind ruling that says musicians can enforce U.S. copyright termination rules across the globe, adopting a novel legal theory that record labels and publishers have warned will disrupt “a half-century of settled industry norms.”

Upholding a lower court decision last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled Monday (Jan. 12) that songwriter Cyril Vetter could win back full global copyright ownership of the 1963 rock classic “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love)” from publisher Resnik Music Group.=

What makes the ruling notable is the overseas reach. Termination, a crucial copyright provision that allows authors to recapture their rights decades after they sold them away, has only ever applied to American copyrights and had no effect on foreign countries. But the appeals court said that was not how Congress intended termination to work."

Britain seeks 'reset' in copyright battle between AI and creators; Reuters, January 13, 2026

Reuters; Britain seeks 'reset' in copyright battle between AI and creators

"British technology minister Liz Kendall said on Tuesday the government was seeking a "reset" on plans to overhaul copyright rules to accommodate artificial intelligence, pledging to protect creators while unlocking AI's economic potential.

Creative industries worldwide are grappling with legal and ethical challenges posed by AI systems that generate original content after being trained on popular works, often without compensating the original creators."

 

Arkansas begins new search for ‘monument to the unborn’ design after artist seeks copyright; Arkansas Advocate, January 13, 2026

TESS VRBIN, Arkansas Advocate; Arkansas begins new search for ‘monument to the unborn’ design after artist seeks copyright

"Efforts to build a “monument to the unborn” on the state Capitol grounds advocated by abortion opponents hit a new stumbling block Tuesday when the secretary of state began looking for new designs for the memorial.

The Capitol Arts and Grounds Commission voted with no dissent to allow Secretary of State Cole Jester to accept new submissions for the monument after the artist it selected in late 2023 applied for a federal copyright for her design. Jester said that move would interfere with the state’s efforts to market the anti-abortion monument.

“We couldn’t sell a Christmas tree ornament with it,” Jester said. “We couldn’t do so many things, and it would be very problematic.”...

The commission had previously selected artist Lakey Goff’s idea of a “living wall” of flora and fauna for the monument and accepted her suggestion to place it in the grassy space behind the Capitol and to the north of the Supreme Court building...

She wanted to copyright her proposal so it would remain “true to my original inspiration and design, which came from the Lord, the Holy Spirit,” she said.

The proposal had an estimated $900,000 price tag, and Goff said in August 2025 that she expected to have raised a total of $100,000 for the project by the end of October. Act 310 of 2023 established a trust fund to raise money through private gifts, grants and donations, and fundraising for the project began in May 2024...

Commissioner Stephen Bright, a former state representative and the Secretary of State’s Chief Taxpayer Services Officer, told the New York Times last year that he hoped to change the design to reduce its cost to about $700,000. The design would be unchangeable once copyrighted."

Türkiye issues ethics framework to regulate AI use in schools; Daily Sabah, January 11, 2026

 Daily Sabah; Türkiye issues ethics framework to regulate AI use in schools

"The Ministry of National Education has issued a comprehensive set of ethical guidelines to regulate the use of artificial intelligence in schools, introducing mandatory online ethical declarations and a centralized reporting system aimed at ensuring transparency, accountability and student safety.

The Ethical Guidelines for Artificial Intelligence Applications in Education set out the rules for how AI technologies may be developed, implemented, monitored and evaluated across public education institutions. The guidelines were prepared under the ministry’s Artificial Intelligence Policy Document and Action Plan for 2025-2029, which came into effect on June 17, 2025."

To anybody still using X: sexual abuse content is the final straw, it’s time to leave; The Guardian, January 12, 2026

 Marie Le Conte, The Guardian; To anybody still using X: sexual abuse content is the final straw, it’s time to leave

"What does matter is that X is drifting towards irrelevance, becoming a containment pen for jumped-up fascists. Government ministers cannot be making policy announcements in a space that hosts AI-generated, near-naked pictures of young girls. Journalists cannot share their work in a place that systematically promotes white supremacy. Regular people cannot be getting their brains slowly but surely warped by Maga propaganda.

We all love to think that we have power and agency, and that if we try hard enough we can manage to turn the tide – but X is long dead. The only winning move now is to step away from the chess board, and make our peace with it once and for all."

‘Clock Is Ticking’ For Creators On AI Content Copyright Claims, Experts Warn; Forbes, January 9, 2026

 Rob Salkowitz, Forbes; ‘Clock Is Ticking’ For Creators On AI Content Copyright Claims, Experts Warn

"Despite this string of successes, creators like BT caution that content owners need to move quickly to secure any kind of terms. “A lot of artists have their heads in the sand with respect to AI,” he said. “The fact is, if they don’t come to some kind of agreement, they may end up with nothing.”

The concern is that AI models are increasingly being trained on synthetic data: that is, on the output of AI systems, rather than on content attributable to any individual creator or rights owner. Gartner estimates that 75% of AI training data in 2026 will be synthetic. That number could hit 100% by 2030. Once the tech companies no longer need human-produced content, they will stop paying for it.

“The quality of outputs from AI systems has been improving dramatically, which means that it is possible to train on synthetic data without risking model collapse,” said Dr. Daniela Braga, founder and CEO of the data training firm Defined.ai, in a separate interview at CES. “The window is definitely closing for individual rights owners to secure favorable terms.”

Other experts suggest that these claims may be overstated.

Braga says the best way creators can protect themselves is to do business with ethical companies willing to provide compensation for high-quality human-produced content and represent the superior value of that content to their customers. As models grow in capabilities, the need will shift from sheer volume of data to data that is appropriately tagged and annotated to fit easily into specific use cases.

There remain some profound questions around the sustainability of AI from a business standpoint, with demand for services among enterprise and consumers lagging the massive, and massively expensive, build-out of capacity. For some artists opposed to generative AI in its entirety, there may be the temptation to wait it out until the bubble bursts. After all, these artists created their work to be enjoyed by humans, not to be consumed in bulk by machines threatening their livelihoods. In light of those objections, the prospect of a meager payout might seem unappealing."

The Trump Administration's Deportation Reels Keep Getting Copyright Strikes for Using Music Without Permission; Reason , February/ March 2026 Issue

AUTUMN BILLINGS , Reason; The Trump Administration's Deportation Reels Keep Getting Copyright Strikes for Using Music Without Permission

"As masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents deploy to U.S. cities, the Trump administration is also running a social media campaign. Its effort to stay viral online is colliding with copyright law.

Between January 26 and November 10, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) posted 487 times on Instagram—more than 28 percent of the agency's total posting since joining the platform in 2014. The posts promote the crackdown by mixing 20th century propaganda with modern memes, and they feature a wide range of popular imagery and audio.

But not all the content they use has been licensed—or welcomed. Several creators have pushed back on the unauthorized use of their copyright-protected work."