Hollywood's copyright fight meets China's AI boom; Axios, February 19, 2026

Madison Mills, Sara Fischer, Axios; Hollywood's copyright fight meets China's AI boom

"The big picture: Hollywood is leaning on copyright law to rein in Seedance, but legal pressure hasn't slowed the rise of Chinese AI models more broadly."

Anthropic is clashing with the Pentagon over AI use. Here’s what each side wants; CNBC, February 18, 2026

 Ashley Capoot, CNBC; Anthropic is clashing with the Pentagon over AI use. Here’s what each side wants

"Anthropic wants assurance that its models will not be used for autonomous weapons or to “spy on Americans en masse,” according to a report from Axios. 

The DOD, by contrast, wants to use Anthropic’s models “for all lawful use cases” without limitation."

Palantir is caught in the middle of a brewing fight between Anthropic and the Pentagon; Fast Company, February 17, 2026

 REBECCA HEILWEIL, Fast Company; Palantir is caught in the middle of a brewing fight between Anthropic and the Pentagon

"A dispute between AI company Anthropic and the Pentagon over how the military can use the company’s technology has now gone public. Amid tense negotiations, Anthropic has reportedly called for limits on two key applications: mass surveillance and autonomous weapons. The Department of Defense, which Trump renamed the Department of War last year, wants the freedom to use the technology without those restrictions.

Caught in the middle is Palantir. The defense contractor provides the secure cloud infrastructure that allows the military to use Anthropic’s Claude model, but it has stayed quiet as tensions escalate. That’s even as the Pentagon, per Axios, threatens to designate Anthropic a “supply chain risk,” a move that could force Palantir to cut ties with one of its most important AI partners."

Pentagon threatens Anthropic punishment; Axios, February 16, 2026

 Dave Lawler, Maria Curi, Mike Allen, Axios; Pentagon threatens Anthropic punishment

"Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is "close" to cutting business ties with Anthropic and designating the AI company a "supply chain risk" — meaning anyone who wants to do business with the U.S. military has to cut ties with the company, a senior Pentagon official told Axios.

The senior official said: "It will be an enormous pain in the ass to disentangle, and we are going to make sure they pay a price for forcing our hand like this."

Why it matters: That kind of penalty is usually reserved for foreign adversaries. 

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told Axios: "The Department of War's relationship with Anthropic is being reviewed. Our nation requires that our partners be willing to help our warfighters win in any fight. Ultimately, this is about our troops and the safety of the American people."

The big picture: Anthropic's Claude is the only AI model currently available in the military's classified systems, and is the world leader for many business applications. Pentagon officials heartily praise Claude's capabilities."

The secret Afghan women’s book club defying the Taliban to read Orwell; The Guardian, February 19, 2026

 Azada Raha, from Rukhshana Media, The Guardian; The secret Afghan women’s book club defying the Taliban to read Orwell

"Most of the books the five women have discussed since they started the reading circle last June are classics, and most deal with issues of power, suffering, and the place of women, though they have embraced variety. The works they’ve read include George Orwell’s Animal Farm, Ernest Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea, Zoya Pirzad’s I’ll Turn Off the Lights and Symphony of the Dead, also by Abbas Maroufi.

Most of the books can be found online and downloaded free, although occasionally they borrow books from libraries.

They meet every week for an hour-and-a-half at the home of one of the members, varying the location to avoid scrutiny in a country where women’s freedoms have been severely curtailed."

Censorship Comes for Stephen Colbert; The Atlantic, February 17, 2026

  David A. Graham , The Atlantic; Censorship Comes for Stephen Colbert

"Crackdowns on speech by prominent figures pave a way for the government to regulate speech more broadly, which should be concerning for people of any political leaning because the party and people in power can change."

Trump Wants His Name Trademarked For Airports—Raising Questions About Profiteering; Forbes, February 18, 2026

Suzanne Rowan Kelleher , Forbes; Trump Wants His Name Trademarked For Airports—Raising Questions About Profiteering

"President Trump’s private company has filed for trademarks for airports using his name—setting up the possibility he could profit from what has historically been an honor in name only—just as plans take flight for an airport near his Florida home to be renamed after him."

Dinner Is Being Recorded, Whether You Know It or Not; The New York Times, February 16, 2026

  Luke Fortney , The New York Times; Dinner Is Being Recorded, Whether You Know It or Not

"To be in public is to risk being filmed. And these days, there’s a good chance it’s happening surreptitiously with smart glasses. Their wearers are filming in restaurants, cafes and bars, capturing warped, eye-level video of drive-through pranks, Michelin-starred meals and work shifts at Texas Roadhouse. Servers, owners and customers can end up as captive participants...

Filming in public spaces is broadly protected by the First Amendment. Some states, including California and Pennsylvania, have two-party consent laws that prohibit recording without express permission, but enforcing them hinges on whether someone has a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in a given setting, said Aaron Krowne, a New York City lawyer specializing in privacy and civil liberties. Restaurants fall in a legal gray area: They are privately owned, but open to anyone who walks in...

The responsibility of using these devices ethically falls largely on the wearer."

1970 No. 1 Hit Song Sparked the Decade’s Biggest Copyright Lawsuit; Men's Journal, February 17, 2026

 MATTHEW THOMAS, Men's Journal; 1970 No. 1 Hit Song Sparked the Decade’s Biggest Copyright Lawsuit

"On November 28, 1970, George Harrison’s “My Sweet Lord/Isn’t It a Pity” reached number 1 on the Billboard chart together. The songs would hold that top slot for 4 weeks and spend 14 weeks on the charts in total.

“My Sweet Lord” soon spawned an infamous “subconscious plagiarism” legal fight that resulted in a landmark ruling that still profoundly affects the music industry today."

New research from Notre Dame theologian and Vatican working group explores how to ‘reclaim human agency’ in age of AI; Notre Dame News, February 17, 2026

 Carrie Gates, Notre Dame News; New research from Notre Dame theologian and Vatican working group explores how to ‘reclaim human agency’ in age of AI

"One of the fundamental promises of artificial intelligence is that it will strengthen human agency by freeing us from mundane, repetitive tasks.

However, a new publication, co-edited by University of Notre Dame theologian Paul Scherz, argues that promise “rings hollow” in the face of efforts by technology companies to manipulate consumers — and ultimately deprive them of agency.

The book, “Reclaiming Human Agency in the Age of Artificial Intelligence,” is the second in a series created by the Vatican’s AI Research Group for the Centre for Digital Culture. Part of the Holy See’s Dicastery for Culture and Education, the group is composed of scholars from across North America who represent a range of disciplines from theology and philosophy to computer science and business.

“We wanted to examine the idea of how AI affects human actions, human freedom and the ability of people to develop virtues — which we classified under the heading of human agency,” said Scherz, the Our Lady of Guadalupe College Professor of Theology and the ND–IBM Tech Ethics Lab Program Chair. “This is such an important topic right now because one of the most hyped developments that we’re hearing about right now is ‘agentic’ AI — or AI that will take action for people.

“We think it’s important to distinguish what the differences are between these AI agents and true human agents — and how the AI we have now is affecting our actions.”

In “Reclaiming Human Agency,” Scherz, co-editor Brian Patrick Green of Santa Clara University and their fellow research group members cite potentially problematic issues with the technology, including addictive applications, “surveillance capitalism” that exploits users’ personal data for profit, widespread de-skilling in the workplace as complex tasks are handed over to AI and the growth of algorithmic governance — where social media algorithms influence what people buy, how they perceive events and even how they vote.

They also assert that human agency should not be seen in terms of “freedom from” tasks, but in “freedom for” pursuing the good, seeking excellence and purpose by building flourishing relationships with others and with God."

Setting AI Policy; Library Journal, February 9, 2026

 Matt Enis, Library Journal; Setting AI Policy

"As artificial intelligence tools become pervasive, public libraries may want to establish transparent guidelines for how they are used by staff

Policy statements are important, because “people have very different ideas about what is acceptable or appropriate,” says Nick Tanzi, assistant director at South Huntington Public Library (SHPL), NY, who was recently selected by the Public Library Association to be part of a Transformative Technology Task Force focused on artificial intelligence (AI).

In the library field, opinions about AI—particularly with the recent emergence of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Copilot—currently run the gamut from enthusiastic adoption to informed objection. But even the technology’s detractors would agree that AI has already become an integral part of the information-seeking tools many people use every day. Google searches now frequently generate Gemini AI responses as top results. Microsoft has ingrained Copilot into its Windows OS and Office software. ChatGPT’s global monthly active users exceeded 800 million at the end of 2025. Patrons are using these tools, and they may have questions or need assistance. Libraries should be clear about how these and other AI technologies are being used within their institutions."

Why an A.I. Video of Tom Cruise Battling Brad Pitt Spooked Hollywood; The New York Times, February 16, 2026

Derrick Bryson Taylor, The New York Times; Why an A.I. Video of Tom Cruise Battling Brad Pitt Spooked Hollywood

 "Charles Rivkin, the chairman and chief executive of the Motion Picture Association, called on ByteDance to “immediately cease its infringing activity,” saying in a statement that Seedance 2.0 had engaged in the unauthorized use of copyrighted works on a “massive scale.” Human Artistry Campaign, a global coalition that advocates using A.I. “with respect for the irreplaceable artists, performers and creatives,” said on social media that unauthorized works generated by Seedance 2.0 violated the “most basic aspects of personal autonomy.”

Disney, which in a watershed $1 billion deal last year agreed to allow OpenAI’s Sora users to generate video content with its characters, sent a cease-and-desist letter to ByteDance, accusing it of supplying Seedance with a “pirated library” of Disney’s characters — “as if Disney’s coveted intellectual property were free public-domain clip art.”

ByteDance, which also owns TikTok and has been valued at $480 billion in the private markets, said in a statement that it respected intellectual property rights and was aware of the concerns about Seedance."

The economics of AI outweigh ethics for tech CEOs, business leader says; CNN, February 16, 2026

 CNN; The economics of AI outweigh ethics for tech CEOs, business leader says

"Podcast host and business leader Scott Galloway joins Dana Bash on "Inside Politics" to discuss the need for comprehensive government regulation of AI. “We have increasingly outsourced our ethics, our civic responsibility, what is good for the public to the CEOs of companies of tech," Galloway tells Bash, adding, "This is another example of how government is failing to step in and provide thoughtful, sensible regulations.” His comments come as the Pentagon confirms it's reviewing a contract with AI company Anthropic after a reported clash over the scope of AI guardrails."

AI legal advice is driving lawyers bananas; Axios, February 9, 2026

 Emily Peck, Axios; AI legal advice is driving lawyers bananas

"AI promises to make work more productive for lawyers, but there's a problem: Their clients are using it, too.

Why it matters: The rise of AI is creating new headaches for attorneys: They're worried about the fate of the billable hour, a reliable profit center for aeons, and are perturbed by clients getting bad legal advice from chatbots.

Zoom in: "It's like the WebMD effect on steroids," says Dave Jochnowitz, a partner at the law firm Outten & Golden, referring to how medical websites can give people a misguided understanding of their condition."

ByteDance says it will add safeguards to Seedance 2.0 following Hollywood backlash; CNBC, February 16, 2026

Dylan Butts, CNBC; ByteDance says it will add safeguards to Seedance 2.0 following Hollywood backlash

"Chinese tech giant ByteDance has said it will strengthen safeguards on a new artificial intelligence video-making tool, following complaints of copyright theft from entertainment giants. 

The tool, Seedance 2.0, enables users to create realistic videos based on text prompts. However, viral videos shared online appear to show copyrighted characters and celebrity likenesses, raising intellectual property concerns in the U.S. 

“ByteDance respects intellectual property rights and we have heard the concerns regarding Seedance 2.0,” a company spokesperson said in a statement shared with CNBC."

Accounting giant KPMG fines partner for using AI to cheat on training exam; Semafor, February 16, 2026

 Tom Chivers, Semafor ; Accounting giant KPMG fines partner for using AI to cheat on training exam

"The accounting giant KPMG fined one of its partners for using AI to cheat on a training exam… about using AI, one of a number of unintentionally illustrative incidents involving the firm. 

The $7,000 fine is one of several penalties it has meted out: Dozens of other staff have also been caught cheating on exams using AI."

I Trusted Jeff Bezos. The Joke’s on Me.; The New York Times, February 14, 2026

  Lydia Polgreen, The New York Times; I Trusted Jeff Bezos. The Joke’s on Me.

"At the end of the century, a journalism scholar published a fascinating comparative study of regional newspapers in the early 1960s and the late 1990s. “Papers of the 1960s seem naïvely trusting of government, shamelessly boosterish, unembarrassedly hokey and obliging,” Carl Sessions Stepp, the researcher, wrote. Newspapers of the ’90s were “better written, better looking, better organized, more responsible, less sensational, less sexist and racist and more informative and public-spirited.”

This sounds, you might think, salutary for the health of democracy. But it may have been precisely this move, away from deferential stenography and toward fearless investigation, that led to declining trust in the news media. Aggressive, probing and accountability-oriented journalism held up a mirror to American society — and many Americans didn’t like what they saw.

“As news grew more negative and more critical, people had more reason to find journalism distasteful,” the media scholar Michael Schudson wrote in a provocative essay on the problem of assessing trust in journalism. “What people do not like about the media is its implicit or explicit criticism of their heroes or their home teams.” No one, famously, likes the bearer of bad news.

Thinking back to that dinner with Bezos, I realized that something similar had happened. He flattered my chosen profession, reassuring me that it was not a cynical undertaking but something much more noble. He told me, in short, what I wanted to hear — and won my trust. In the intervening years, Bezos has apparently decided that his flattery is better aimed at a very different audience: Donald Trump.

During the 2024 presidential campaign, Bezos notoriously demanded that The Post spike its planned endorsement of Kamala Harris, at great cost to the paper. After the election, he donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee and joined the row of plutocrats at the inauguration. Amazon paid $40 million for the rights to a documentary about Melania Trump, spent tens of millions more to market the movie and donated to Trump’s absurd White House mega-ballroom project. It’s certainly one way to win trust.

The Post’s loss is others’ gain. Its best-known journalists have streamed out the door, joining thriving news organizations like The Atlantic, The Wall Street Journal and The Times. These companies’ success, built on aggressive and independent reporting, makes me wonder whether the hand-wringing about trust is misplaced. In this new gilded age, maybe we should set aside trust and — as Bezos himself once urged — embrace skepticism."

How ‘Nirvanna the Band the Show the Movie’ pushed the limits of copyright law to create its most WTF moments; Page Six Hollywood, February 14, 2026

 Katcy Stephan, Page Six Hollywood; How ‘Nirvanna the Band the Show the Movie’ pushed the limits of copyright law to create its most WTF moments

"“Nirvanna the Band the Show the Movie,” the latest mockumentary collaboration between director Matt Johnson and composer Jay McCarrol, probably shouldn’t exist. The film features extended parodies that carefully skirt copyright law, a stunt that sees the duo literally dive off Toronto’s CN tower and at least two dozen more moments that will leave audiences asking “How the hell is this legal?” 

It’s a miracle the film made it to screens at all."

How Fast Can A.I. Change the Workplace?; The New York Times, February 14, 2026

 ROSS DOUTHAT, The New York Times; How Fast Can A.I. Change the Workplace?

"People need to understand the part of this argument that’s absolutely correct: It is impossible to look at the A.I. models we have now, to say nothing of what we might get in six months or a year, and say that these technological tools can’t eventually replace a lot of human jobs. The question is whether people inside the A.I. hype loop are right about how fast it could happen, and then whether it will create a fundamental change in human employment rather than just a structural reshuffle.

One obstacle to radical speed is that human society is a complex bottleneck through which even the most efficiency-maxing innovations have to pass. As long as the efficiencies offered by A.I. are mediated by human workers, there will be false starts and misadaptations and blind alleys that make pre-emptive layoffs reckless or unwise.

Even if firings make sense as a pure value proposition, employment in an advanced economy reflects a complex set of contractual, social, legal and bureaucratic relationships, not just a simple productivity-maximizing equation. So many companies might delay any mass replacement for reasons of internal morale or external politics or union rules, and adapt to A.I.’s new capacities through reduced hiring and slow attrition instead.

I suspect the A.I. insiders underestimate the power of these frictions, as they may underestimate how structural hurdles could slow the adoption of any cure or tech that their models might discover. Which would imply a longer adaptation period for companies, polities and humans.

Then, after this adaptation happens, and A.I. agents are deeply integrated into the work force, there are two good reasons to think that most people will still be doing gainful work. The first is the entire history of technological change: Every great innovation has yielded fears of mass unemployment and, every time we’ve found our way to new professions, new demands for human labor that weren’t imaginable before.

The second is the reality that people clearly like a human touch, even in situations where we can already automate it away. The economist Adam Ozimek has a good rundown of examples: Player pianos have not done away with piano players, self-checkout has not eliminated the profession of cashier and millions of waiters remain in service in the United States because an automated restaurant experience seems inhuman."

Microsoft AI CEO predicts 'most, if not all' white-collar tasks will be automated by AI within 18 months; Business Insider, February 12, 2026

 Lloyd Lee and Kelsey Vlamis, Business Insider; Microsoft AI CEO predicts 'most, if not all' white-collar tasks will be automated by AI within 18 months

[Kip Currier: Microsoft AI Chief Mustafa Suleyman's assertion that AI will be performing "most, if not all" white-collar  tasks within 12 to 18 months raises lots of questions, like:

• Is this forecast accurate or AI hype?
• As individuals and societies, do we want AI to displace human workers? Who has decided that this is "a good thing"?
• What are the spiritual implications of this revolutionary transformation of our world?
• What are the implications of such changes for the physical and mental well-being of children, young people, and adults?
• What are the short-term and long-term cognitive impacts of AI use?
• How will marginalized persons around the globe be affected by such radical employment changes? How will the Global South be impacted?
• What are the implications for income disparities and wealth concentration?
• In what ways will culture, the arts, science, medicine, and research be influenced?
• What are the impacts on education, life-long learning, and professional development?
• How will the environment, diminishing resources like water, and climate change be influenced by this employment forecast?
• In what ways will AI proliferation impact people in need and the fauna and flora of the world, particularly vulnerable organisms and ecosystems?
• How will monies and resources spent on AI data centers create new environmental justice communities and exacerbate inequities in existing ones?
• What are the implications for democracy, human rights, and civil liberties, like privacy, data agency, free expression, intellectual freedom, and access to accurate, uncensored information?
• Do you trust AI to do the white-collar jobs that humans have done? 
• Are Microsoft and Suleyman disinterested parties? Microsoft has major self-interest in hyping AI enterprise products that Microsoft will be charging users to adopt and license.
• If Suleyman's claim is accurate, or even is accurate but in a longer time period than 12 to 18 months, what kinds of oversight, regulations, and ethical guardrails are needed/desired?]

[Excerpt]

"Mustafa Suleyman, the Microsoft AI chief, said in an interview with the Financial Times that he predicts most, if not every, task in white-collar fields will be automated by AI within the next year or year and a half.

"I think that we're going to have a human-level performance on most, if not all, professional tasks," Suleyman said in the interview that was published Wednesday. "So white-collar work, where you're sitting down at a computer, either being a lawyer or an accountant or a project manager or a marketing person — most of those tasks will be fully automated by an AI within the next 12 to 18 months.""

Scoop: Disney sends cease and desist letter to ByteDance over Seedance 2.0; Axios, February 13, 2026

Sara Fischer, Axios ; Scoop: Disney sends cease and desist letter to ByteDance over Seedance 2.0

"The Walt Disney Company on Friday sent a cease-and-desist letter to ByteDance, alleging the Chinese tech giant has been infringing on its works to train and develop an AI video generation model without compensation, according to a copy of the letter obtained by Axios.

Why it matters: It's the most serious action a Hollywood studio has taken so far against ByteDance since it launched Seedance 2.0 on Thursday. 

Zoom in: The letter, addressed to ByteDance global general counsel John Rogovin, accuses ByteDance of pre-packaging its Seedance service "with a pirated library of Disney's copyrighted characters from Star Wars, Marvel, and other Disney franchises, as if Disney's coveted intellectual property were free public domain clip art." 

"Over Disney's well-publicized objections, ByteDance is hijacking Disney's characters by reproducing, distributing, and creating derivative works featuring those characters. ByteDance's virtual smash-and-grab of Disney's IP is willful, pervasive, and totally unacceptable," Disney's outside attorney David Singer wrote. 

"We believe this is just the tip of the iceberg – which is shocking considering Seedance has only been available for a few days," he added.

Between the lines: The letter includes a slew of examples of infringing Seedance videos that feature Disney's copyrighted characters, including Spider-Man, Darth Vader, Star Wars' Grogu (Baby Yoda), Peter Griffin from Family Guy and others."

The Guardian view on the BBC World Service: this is London calling; The Guardian, February 13, 2026

 Editorial,The Guardian; The Guardian view on the BBC World Service: this is London calling

[Kip Currier: This is the "money quote" for me in this persuasive Guardian Editorial on supporting the BBC World Service:

Accurate journalism is the strongest weapon in the war of information.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/feb/13/the-guardian-view-on-the-bbc-world-service-this-is-london-calling]

With just seven weeks before its funding runs out, the UK’s greatest cultural asset and most trusted international news organisation must be supported

"The programmes will neither be very interesting nor very good,” said the then BBC director general John Reith, when he launched its Empire Service in December 1932. Nearly a century later, the BBC World Service, as it is now known, broadcasts in 43 languages, reaches 313 million people a week and is one of the UK’s most influential cultural assets. It is also a lifeline for millions. “Perhaps Britain’s greatest gift to the world” in the 20th century, as Kofi Annan, the former UN secretary general, once put it.

But this week Tim Davie, the corporation’s director general, announced that the World Service will run out of funding in just seven weeks. Most of its £400m budget comes from the licence fee, although the Foreign Office – which funded it entirely until 2014 – contributed £137m in the last year. The funding arrangement with the Foreign Office finishes at the end of March. There is no plan for what happens next.

Meanwhile, Russia and China are pouring billions into state-run media. And American news organisations are crumbling under the Trump administration. Last week the Washington Post axed 300 jobs including its Ukraine reporter, and hundreds were lost at Voice of America, the closest US equivalent to the BBC, last year.

Although some question why licence-fee payers should subsidise services largely consumed abroad, it is also loved by many at home. In the small hours, it is a window on a dark world, an alternative to doomscrolling and a pushback against parochialism. Jeremy Paxman summed it up when he compared the World Service to a cords- and cardigan-wearing “ageing uncle who’s seen it all. It has a style that makes understatement seem like flamboyance”. But we should not allow this cosy, slightly fusty image to obscure its purpose.

For many it is not just life-enhancing, but life‑saving. Last month, during the internet blackout in Iran, the BBC’s Persian service provided additional radio programmes over shortwave and medium wave. Emergency services were also launched in response to conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, Gaza and Sudan, and after the earthquake in Myanmar. It remains the only international news organisation still broadcasting inside Afghanistan, setting up an education programme for Afghan children in 2024.

But it has been beleaguered by cuts, closures and job losses. In 2022, radio broadcasts in 10 languages including Arabic, Persian, Chinese and Bengali were replaced by digital services, a decision criticised for disproportionately affecting women, who rely most on radios. Wherever the BBC has been forced to withdraw – for financial or political pressures – propaganda has been quick to fill the gap.

No one doubts the World Service’s value as an instrument of soft power. But, as BBC bosses argue, it is also part of our national security. Accurate journalism is the strongest weapon in the war of information. The World Service must not be allowed to stumble into decline. Mr Davie is right – if optimistic – to urge the government to back it decisively and urgently.

During the second world war, radio was “scattering human voices into the darkness of Europe”, Penelope Fitzgerald wrote in her 1980 novel Human Voices, based on her time working for the BBC. Amid the AI noise and disinformation, the World Service must be enabled to keep scattering human voices in our own dark times."