Wednesday, April 24, 2024

U.S. bans noncompete agreements for nearly all jobs; NPR, April 23, 2024

  , NPR; U.S. bans noncompete agreements for nearly all jobs

"The Federal Trade Commission narrowly voted Tuesday to ban nearly all noncompetes, employment agreements that typically prevent workers from joining competing businesses or launching ones of their own...

"For more than a year, the group has vigorously opposed the ban, saying that noncompetes are vital to companies, by allowing them to better guard trade secrets, and employees, by giving employers greater incentive to invest in workforce training and development."

Tuesday, April 23, 2024

LeBron James tattoo artist loses trial against 'NBA 2K' maker Take-Two; Reuters, April 19, 2024

 , Reuters; LeBron James tattoo artist loses trial against 'NBA 2K' maker Take-Two

"Take-Two Interactive's 2K Games, the maker of the popular 'NBA 2K' basketball video-game series, convinced an Ohio federal jury on Friday to reject allegations that its use of LeBron James' tattoos in its games violated the rights of the Cleveland-based artist who inked them.

The jury determined that Take-Two had an implied license to depict the tattoos based on its agreement to use James' likeness in the games and found that tattoo artist Jimmy Hayden's copyrights had not been infringed."

Tuesday, April 16, 2024

Congress Explores AI and Copyright Law; The Federalist Society, April 16, 2024

Lynn White, The Federalist Society; Congress Explores AI and Copyright Law

"Interest in artificial intelligence (AI) has surged in the 118th Congress. There have been several hearings on a range of topics related to AI, including how federal agencies are using it and general principles for regulating its use. The House Committee on Judiciary, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, has held a series of hearings related to AI and Intellectual Property...

Members of the committee seemed interested in the content of the hearing and expressed appreciation for the bi-partisan approach used to explore the issue of AI and intellectual property. Chairman Issa noted that this hearing was just the first of many. He further stated that he believes that Congress will find some middle ground that respects existing copyright law but allows generative AI to continue to grow. Over the next few blog posts, we will summarize this series of hearings and highlight the issues the witnesses and members of Congress discussed."

Sunday, April 14, 2024

Public domain, where there is life after copyright; CBS News, Sunday Morning, April 14, 2024

Lee Cowan , CBS News, Sunday Morning; Public domain, where there is life after copyright

"Jenkins said, "The public domain doesn't represent the death of copyright. It's just the second part of copyright's life cycle."

The concept of putting an expiration date on intellectual property was something the founding fathers actually put in the U.S. Constitution, "...to promote the progress of science and the useful arts." They left it to Congress, however, to decide just how long copyright terms should last...

Duke University's Jennifer Jenkins said, "Copyright gives rights to creators and their descendants that provide incentives to create. But the public domain really is the soil for future creativity."

There are surely more copyright clashes ahead. Characters like Bugs Bunny, Superman and Batman will all find themselves out of copyright protection soon enough.

Even Luke Skywalker will eventually find himself in the public domain, too, sometime around 2073. That sure seems like a galaxy far, far way."

Tuesday, April 9, 2024

New bill would force AI companies to reveal use of copyrighted art; The Guardian, April 9, 2024

, The Guardian ; New bill would force AI companies to reveal use of copyrighted art

"A bill introduced in the US Congress on Tuesday intends to force artificial intelligence companies to reveal the copyrighted material they use to make their generative AI models. The legislation adds to a growing number of attempts from lawmakers, news outlets and artists to establish how AI firms use creative works like songs, visual art, books and movies to train their software–and whether those companies are illegally building their tools off copyrighted content.

The California Democratic congressman Adam Schiff introduced the bill, the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act, which would require that AI companies submit any copyrighted works in their training datasets to the Register of Copyrights before releasing new generative AI systems, which create text, images, music or video in response to users’ prompts. The bill would need companies to file such documents at least 30 days before publicly debuting their AI tools, or face a financial penalty. Such datasets encompass billions of lines of text and images or millions of hours of music and movies."

OpenAI’s GPT Store Is Triggering Copyright Complaints; Wired, April 4, 2024

Kate Knibbs, Wired ; OpenAI’s GPT Store Is Triggering Copyright Complaints

"It is easy to find bots in the GPT Store whose descriptions suggest they might be tapping copyrighted content in some way, as Techcrunch noted in a recent article claiming OpenAI’s store was overrun with “spam.” Using copyrighted material without permission is permissable in some contexts but in others rightsholders can take legal action."

Saturday, April 6, 2024

Where AI and property law intersect; Arizona State University (ASU) News, April 5, 2024

 Dolores Tropiano, Arizona State University (ASU) News; Where AI and property law intersect

"Artificial intelligence is a powerful tool that has the potential to be used to revolutionize education, creativity, everyday life and more.

But as society begins to harness this technology and its many uses — especially in the field of generative AI — there are growing ethical and copyright concerns for both the creative industry and legal sector.

Tyson Winarski is a professor of practice with the Intellectual Property Law program in Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. He teaches an AI and intellectual property module within the course Artificial Intelligence: Law, Ethics and Policy, taught by ASU Law Professor Gary Marchant.

“The course is extremely important for attorneys and law students,” Winarski said. “Generative AI is presenting huge issues in the area of intellectual property rights and copyrights, and we do not have definitive answers as Congress and the courts have not spoken on the issue yet.”"

Friday, April 5, 2024

Swift’s Latest Hit: Copyright Law; Boston College Law School Magazine Online, April 5, 2024

Sean Doolittle ’24, Boston College Law School Magazine Online; Swift’s Latest Hit: Copyright Law

"Greenstein described the impact that Swift’s gambit has had on the music industry: “Labels invest in artists, they hire producers, they pay for recording time, and they want to recover that investment. Recording agreements often prohibited musical artists from going out and re-recording a song for a period of five to seven years from the original release date of the record, or two years from the expiration of the contract. Now, thanks to Taylor Swift, they’re pushing that up to ten, fifteen, maybe even thirty years,” he warned. Once bitten, twice shy, as they say.

Swift has, in other words, slammed the door in the face of new artists hoping to come up through the recording industry, making it that much harder for future musicians to negotiate for ownership of their music. Now, up-and-coming musicians will be largely stripped of the ability to re-record their music and acquire the phonogram copyrights in a song for decades—well past their prime popularity, in all likelihood—instead of the traditional five- to seven-year period. Popular established musicians, on the other hand, stand to benefit, reinforcing the exclusive nature of the music industry."

Taylor’s Version of copyright; Harvard Law School, April 3, 2024

Brett Milano, Harvard Law School ; Taylor’s Version of copyright

"When Taylor Swift began re-recording her old albums and releasing the new, improved “Taylor’s Version,” she did more than delight a nation of Swifties. She also opened significant questions about the role of intellectual property in contract law, and possibly tipped the balance toward artists.

According to Gary R. Greenstein, a technology transactions partner at Wilson Sonsini, the Swift affair is one of many that makes these times especially interesting for copyright law. Greenstein’s current practice focuses on intellectual property, licensing, and commercial transactions, with specialized expertise in the digital exploitation of intellectual property. He appeared at Harvard Law School on March 28 for a lunchtime talk, which was presented and introduced by Chris Bavitz, the WilmerHale Clinical Professor of Law and managing director of the law school’s Cyberlaw Clinic. “I have been doing this for 28 years now and there is never a dull moment,” Greenstein said.

Greenstein placed the Swift story in the larger context of music copyrights. In music, he explained, there are always two copyrights. The first is for the musical work itself, and this is usually controlled by the composer/songwriter, or by a publishing company acting on their behalf. The second is the “master,” the recorded performance of the work, and this is usually controlled by the label."

Thursday, April 4, 2024

George Carlin’s Estate Reaches Settlement After A.I. Podcast; The New York Times, April 2, 2024

Christopher Kuo , The New York Times; George Carlin’s Estate Reaches Settlement After A.I. Podcast

"The estate of the comedian George Carlin reached a settlement on Monday with the makers of a podcast who had said they had used artificial intelligence to impersonate Mr. Carlin for a comedy special...

Mr. Carlin’s estate filed the suit in January, saying that Mr. Sasso and Mr. Kultgen, hosts of the podcast “Dudesy,” had infringed on the estate’s copyrights by training an A.I. algorithm on five decades of Mr. Carlin’s work for the special “George Carlin: I’m Glad I’m Dead,” which was posted on YouTube. The lawsuit also said they had illegally used Mr. Carlin’s name and likeness."

Billie Eilish and Nicki Minaj want stop to 'predatory' music AI; BBC, April 2, 2024

 Liv McMahon , BBC; Billie Eilish and Nicki Minaj want stop to 'predatory' music AI

"Billie Eilish and Nicki Minaj are among 200 artists calling for the "predatory" use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the music industry to be stopped.

In an open letter also signed by Katy Perry and the estate of Frank Sinatra, they warn AI "will set in motion a race to the bottom" if left unchecked...

Other artists have since spoken out about it, with Sting telling the BBC he believes musicians face "a battle" to defend their work against the rise of songs written by AI.

"The building blocks of music belong to us, to human beings," he said.

But not all musicians oppose developments in or use of AI across the music industry, and electronic artist Grimes and DJ David Guetta are among those backing the use of such AI tools."

Wednesday, April 3, 2024

‘The People’s Joker’ and the Perils of Playing With a Studio’s Copyright; The New York Times, April 1, 2024

 Eric Grode, The New York Times; ‘The People’s Joker’ and the Perils of Playing With a Studio’s Copyright

"The Joker may be the purview of DC Comics, not Marvel, but the fear of running afoul of copyright laws was no less of a concern.

“I kept myself very informed legally in terms of what qualifies as a parody and what fair use really is,” said Drew, referring to the legal doctrine that allows artists to use copyrighted material without permission or consequence depending on the circumstances. The “People’s Joker” poster calls it “A Fair Use Film by Vera Drew.”

Rebecca Tushnet, a professor at Harvard Law School and an expert in fair use, said artistic works find themselves on safer legal ground when they comment on the original material in a transformative way.

“Favored use is critical in that it performs an interpretation,” said Tushnet, who has not seen the film but was willing to discuss it in the abstract. “A parody is the classic example, but it doesn’t have to be funny. If the metaphor that the Joker represents here is a different metaphor, then it might well fall under the category of transformative fair use."”

Monday, April 1, 2024

A fight to protect the dignity of Michelangelo’s David raises questions about freedom of expression; AP, March 28, 2024

 Colleen Barry, AP; A fight to protect the dignity of Michelangelo’s David raises questions about freedom of expression


"The decisions challenge a widely held practice that intellectual property rights are protected for a specified period before entering the public domain — the artist’s lifetime plus 70 years, according to the Berne Convention signed by more than 180 countries including Italy.

More broadly, the decisions raise the question of whether institutions should be the arbiters of taste, and to what extent freedom of expression is being limited...

Court cases have debated whether Italy’s law violates a 2019 European Union directive stating that any artwork no longer protected by copyright falls into the public domain, meaning that “everybody should be free to make, use and share copies of that work.”

The EU Commission has not addressed the issue, but a spokesman told the AP that it is currently checking “conformity of the national laws implementing the copyright directive” and would look at whether Italy’s cultural heritage code interferes with its application."

Sunday, March 31, 2024

Women transforming industries: Recognizing the power of intellectual property; United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), April 24 12 Noon EDT

United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) ; Women transforming industries: Recognizing the power of intellectual property

"Hear how women innovators are impacting industries across the board with intellectual property (IP) protection at our next Women's Entrepreneurship (WE) event, happening virtually and in person on Wednesday, April 24 from noon to 1 p.m. ET at George Mason University's Mason Enterprise Center in Fairfax, Virginia.

Expert panelists, including women entrepreneurs, small business owners, and inventors, will discuss resources and services that can help you protect your IP, access capital, find mentors, and network with fellow innovators and entrepreneurs.

An agenda and speaker list will be posted soon.

Register today

Thursday, March 28, 2024

AI hustlers stole women’s faces to put in ads. The law can’t help them.; The Washington Post, March 28, 2024

 

, The Washington Post; AI hustlers stole women’s faces to put in ads. The law can’t help them.

"Efforts to prevent this new kind of identity theft have been slow. Cash-strapped police departments are ill equipped to pay for pricey cybercrime investigations or train dedicated officers, experts said. No federal deepfake law exists, and while more than three dozen state legislatures are pushing ahead on AI bills, proposals governing deepfakes are largely limited to political ads and nonconsensual porn."

Meet Sarah Beth Morgan: An Animation Artist Drawn to Purpose; Library of Congress Blogs, March 28, 2024

Ashley Tucker , Library of Congress Blogs; Meet Sarah Beth Morgan: An Animation Artist Drawn to Purpose

"Morgan works in the animation field of “motion graphics,” where she brings graphic shapes, typography, and characters to life. She defines her creative style as “playful, quirky, and maybe even a little bit unexpected.” Her most recent animation, Between Lines, is a short film about “the scarring experience of schoolgirl bullying—and the recovery that follows.” The film has received several accolades, including the Audience Award for Animation at the Brooklyn Film Festival as well as Official Selection at Pictoplasma Berlin and the SCAD Savannah Film Festival...

Animation is an example of a motion picture, which is a type of work that can be registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. Motion Pictures are works that contain a series of related images that are intended to be shown with a projector, digital display, or other device. When the images are shown in successive order, they create an impression of movement that is perceptible to the eye. The Copyright Office offers resources on registering a motion picture and provides ways to help grow a creative business in Copyright Registration at a Glance.

Women creators are an essential part of the copyright system, and participating in it allows women artists to benefit economically from their creative works. In 2022, the Copyright Office released a report, Women in the Copyright System: An Analysis of Women Authors in Copyright Registrations from 1978 to 2020. It found that women creators are significantly underrepresented in registrations, especially compared to their participation in copyright-intensive industries, despite an overall positive trend over time...

Sarah Beth Morgan is one of many women who enhance our nation’s creative landscape. The Copyright Office aims to broaden public awareness of what copyright encompasses and how to participate in it. A cornerstone of the Office’s current strategic plan is the advancement of Copyright for All, and the Office is committed to making the copyright system as clear and accessible to as many members of the public as possible, particularly individuals, small businesses, and historically underserved populations."

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

Amicus Briefs Filed in Internet Archive Copyright Case; Publishers Weekly, March 25, 2024

Andrew Albanese , Publishers Weekly; Amicus Briefs Filed in Internet Archive Copyright Case

"Internet Archive lawyers filed their principal appeal brief on December 15, and 11 amicus briefs were filed in support of the Internet Archive a week later, in December, representing librarians and library associations, authors, public advocacy groups, law professors, and IP scholars, although some of the IA amicus briefs are presented as neutral.

The briefs are the latest development in the long-running copyright infringement case and come a year after a ruling by judge John G. Koeltl on March 24, 2023 that emphatically rejected the IA’s fair use defense, finding the scanning and lending of print library books under a protocol known as “controlled digital lending” to be copyright infringement.

The Internet Archive’s reply brief is now due on April 19, and oral arguments are expected to be set for this fall."

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

Looking Forward: The U.S. Copyright Office’s AI Initiative in 2024; U.S. Copyright Office, March 26, 2024

Nora Scheland, U.S. Copyright Office ; Looking Forward: The U.S. Copyright Office’s AI Initiative in 2024

"More than one year ago, the U.S. Copyright Office launched a comprehensive initiative to examine the impact of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) on copyright law and policy. This blog post highlights the next steps of this ongoing study and summarizes a recent update to Congress from Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter.

Over the coming months, the Office will issue a report, published in several sections, analyzing the impact of AI on copyright and making recommendations about any legislative or regulatory action. The first section will focus on digital replicas, or the use of AI to digitally replicate human artists’ appearances, voices, or other aspects of their identities. This section will be published later this spring.

The second section, to be published this summer, will address the copyrightability of works incorporating AI-generated material. Later sections will focus on the topic of training AI models on copyrighted works as well as any licensing considerations and liability issues. The Office’s goal is to finalize the entire report by the end of the fiscal year.

Separately, the Office will publish an update to the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, the administrative manual for registration. The update, which will follow a public notice requesting comments, will include further guidance and examples relating to the registration of works containing AI-generated material.

Additionally, the Office has brought together a group of government and academic economists to discuss the economic aspects of the intersection of copyright and AI. Later this year, the Office will publish the group’s proposed research agenda.

New announcements, updates, and publications will be posted on the Copyright and Artificial Intelligence webpage throughout the rest of this fiscal year. Subscribe to the Office’s NewsNets to stay up to date on the Office’s AI initiative."

Sunday, March 24, 2024

Generative AI could leave users holding the bag for copyright violations; The Conversation, March 22, 2024

Professor of Information Systems, Michigan State University , The Conversation; ; Generative AI could leave users holding the bag for copyright violations

"How to build guardrails

Legal scholars have dubbed the challenge in developing guardrails against copyright infringement into AI tools the “Snoopy problem.” The more a copyrighted work is protecting a likeness – for example, the cartoon character Snoopy – the more likely it is a generative AI tool will copy it compared to copying a specific image."

Saturday, March 23, 2024

Tennessee becomes the first state to protect musicians and other artists against AI; NPR, March 22, 2024

  Rebecca Rosman, NPR; Tennessee becomes the first state to protect musicians and other artists against AI

"Tennessee made history on Thursday, becoming the first U.S. state to sign off on legislation to protect musicians from unauthorized artificial intelligence impersonation.

"Tennessee (sic) is the music capital of the world, & we're leading the nation with historic protections for TN artists & songwriters against emerging AI technology," Gov. Bill Lee announced on social media.

The Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act, or ELVIS Act, is an updated version of the state's old right of publicity law. While the old law protected an artist's name, photograph or likeness, the new legislation includes AI-specific protections."

Thursday, March 21, 2024

Canada moves to protect coral reef that scientists say ‘shouldn’t exist’; The Guardian, March 15, 2024

, The Guardian; Canada moves to protect coral reef that scientists say ‘shouldn’t exist’

"For generations, members of the Kitasoo Xai’xais and Heiltsuk First Nations, two communities off the Central Coast region of British Columbia, had noticed large groups of rockfish congregating in a fjord system.

In 2021, researchers and the First Nations, in collaboration with the Canadian government, deployed a remote-controlled submersible to probe the depths of the Finlayson Channel, about 300 miles north-west of Vancouver.

On the last of nearly 20 dives, the team made a startling discovery – one that has only recently been made public...

The discovery marks the latest in a string of instances in which Indigenous knowledge has directed researchers to areas of scientific or historic importance. More than a decade ago, Inuk oral historian Louie Kamookak compared Inuit stories with explorers’ logbooks and journals to help locate Sir John Franklin’s lost ships, HMS Erebus and HMS Terror. In 2014, divers located the wreck of the Erebus in a spot Kamookak suggested they search, and using his directions found the Terror two years later."

Wednesday, March 20, 2024

Google hit with $270M fine in France as authority finds news publishers’ data was used for Gemini; TechCrunch, March 20, 2024

Natasha LomasRomain Dillet , TechCrunch; Google hit with $270M fine in France as authority finds news publishers’ data was used for Gemini

"In a never-ending saga between Google and France’s competition authority over copyright protections for news snippets, the Autorité de la Concurrence announced a €250 million fine against the tech giant Wednesday (around $270 million at today’s exchange rate).

According to the competition watchdog, Google disregarded some of its previous commitments with news publishers. But the decision is especially notable because it drops something else that’s bang up-to-date — by latching onto Google’s use of news publishers’ content to train its generative AI model Bard/Gemini.

The competition authority has found fault with Google for failing to notify news publishers of this GenAI use of their copyrighted content. This is in light of earlier commitments Google made which are aimed at ensuring it undertakes fair payment talks with publishers over reuse of their content."

Thursday, March 14, 2024

C-e-a-s-e and desist: 'The New York Times' goes after Wordle spinoffs; NPR, March 13, 2024

 , NPR; C-e-a-s-e and desist: 'The New York Times' goes after Wordle spinoffs

"The New York Times has sent takedown notices to "hundreds" of coders who've made clones of the popular word game, Wordle.

Wordle is a hit online sensation where players have to guess a five-letter word in six tries. Since the newspaper bought it in 2022 from creator Welsh software engineer Josh Wardle, the word game has spawned a litany of spinoffs, from the more complex Quordle to the irreverent Sweardle.

Now, the Times is accusing some Wordle clone creators of copyright infringement violations and asking that their code be removed from the website GitHuba platform that lets developers publicly share their code. The news was first reported last week by 404 Media."

U.S. Copyright Office and USPTO Conclude Joint Study on Non-Fungible Tokens; U.S. Copyright Office, March 12, 2024

U.S. Copyright Office; U.S. Copyright Office and USPTO Conclude Joint Study on Non-Fungible Tokens

"Today, the U.S. Copyright Office and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) (collectively the “Offices”) published the results of their joint study on the intellectual property (IP) law and policy implications of non-fungible tokens (NFTs). The Offices conducted the study in response to a June 2022 request from then-Chair of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property Patrick Leahy and Ranking Member Thom Tillis.

During the joint study, the Offices solicited public comments via a notice of inquiry, held three public roundtables, and examined existing literature and case law. 

In their report, the Offices acknowledged commenters’ views that NFTs may enable artists to secure remuneration for downstream resales of their works; aid trademark owners in expanding their brand appeal; and play a supportive role in the management, transfer, or licensing of IP rights. They also recognized concerns that buyers and sellers do not know what IP rights are implicated in the creation, marketing, and transfer of NFTs and that NFTs may be used to facilitate copyright or trademark infringement. The Offices concluded, however, that existing statutory enforcement mechanisms are currently sufficient to address infringement concerns related to NFT applications and that changes to IP laws, or to the Offices’ registration and recordation practices, are not necessary or advisable at this time. Rather, public education initiatives and product transparency play an important role in ensuring greater awareness and understanding about NFTs.

“We are pleased to share the results of our joint study with Congress, stakeholders, and the public,” said Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office. “The report reflects extensive input from a broad spectrum of commenters, including creators, brand owners, innovators, academics, and practitioners. We look forward to continuing to engage with stakeholders on emerging technologies and implications for IP rights.”

“NFTs offer unique opportunities for creators to leverage their IP rights but also present new challenges in keeping their work secure,” said Kathi Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO. “At the USPTO, we continue to work side-by-side with industry and government collaborators such as the Copyright Office to better understand the IP implications of these evolving technologies through initiatives such as our Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Emerging Technologies (ET) Partnership. We look forward to continuing these efforts and our ongoing work to ensure USPTO’s practices and U.S. policy evolve to address emerging technologies so that we best serve the needs of our nation’s creators and innovators.” 

The full study is available on the Copyright Office’s website and the USPTO’s website."

Moral Rights of the Artist (Humans Only): an Updated US Perspective; Center for Art Law Inc, January 12, 2024

 Irina Tarsis , Center for Art Law IncMoral Rights of the Artist (Humans Only): an Updated US Perspective

"I Defining and codifying moral rights

Moral rights, or droit moral (having originated in France), describe rights of creators in their artistic work that are not necessarily pecuniary, yet still integral to and arise from the idea that an artist's very being is included in the work that they create. Recognition and evolution of visual artists' rights in the United States have been slow to develop, and the scope of moral rights enacted in the United States is limited.

Typically, moral rights are neither alienable nor waivable; they last for the duration of an artist's lifetime and can survive for the benefit and discretion of an artist's estate even after the original work is finished or changes ownership through the stream of public commerce.18 The basic moral rights are as follows:

  1. right of attribution or authorship, which entitles the artist to:
    • be recognised by name for their work or permit the work to be published anonymously;
    • prevent a wrong person being named as the author of their work;
    • prevent having their name be associated with a work that they did not create;
    • decline having their name be associated with a work that has been modified or distorted in such a way as having the authorship remain with the work is prejudicial to the artist; and
    • remove their name from the work in cases of mutilation or the artist's belief that the work is no longer true to its original creation; and
  2. right of integrity, which prevents tampering or modifying the artwork without the artist's consent even after ownership in the artwork transfers;
  3. right of disclosure, which concerns the artist's reputation and provides that the artist has discretion to decide when and how their work can be made public; and
  4. resale royalty rights, which is a semi-economic right assuring that an artist may continue to benefit financially from commercial appreciation of their work in the secondary market by receiving a percentage of the sale proceeds.

These rights are enumerated in the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (the Convention) under Articles 6 bis19 and 14 ter.20 While the US is a signatory to the Convention,21 according to the US Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988, the Convention's acts and protocols are not self-executing under the US Constitution, and they must be implemented through US legislation...

ii Space, the final frontier: back to the future

Statutorily, moral rights of artists in the United States are poorly protected and narrowly enforced; some seemingly substantive claims are dismissed on procedure failure to state a claim,114 as res judicata115 or on industrial design grounds.116 As soon as US artists die, the moral rights evaporate altogether. The cavalier rather than chivalrous attitude towards the vision and the will of the artist persists as tastes and emphasis change. Consider, for example, museums deaccessioning art that was once donated directly by an artist.117 Similarly, consider the trend of covering up or removing the New Deal-Era murals from schools and court houses,118 which is evocative of the problem posed by Serra's Tilted Arc in the 1980s. Until the US Supreme Court reviews a VARA case, or Congress amends the Copyright Law to include a resale royalty provision, artists and their advocates remain limited by the available moral rights protections, and they have to be creative in using public and private law to protect artists' rights. For digital artists, the ability to enforce some of their moral rights is becoming easier, at least on the screen.

As protest art and street art become mainstream, and AI-generated art attracts more fans, in real life and in the metaverse,119 moral rights of artists in the United States are still protected by a patchwork of case law, contracts and state and federal regulations. During the 'Some Like it Digital: Meet Me in the Metaverse' webinars hosted by the Center for Art Law in 2022,120 a guest speaker mentioned that the constitutional law for the metaverse is, or will be, the Copyright Law, for better or worse.

Going forward, will there be more artists expressing themselves in the other verse? In space, outside the boundaries of planet Earth, where their moral right will still need to be protected, for now only against other humans?

In Thaler, District of Columbia Court asked 'Must … originator be a human being to claim copyright protection?' and answered 'yes'; with a footnote: 'The issue of whether non-human sentient beings may be covered by “person” in the Copyright Act is only “fun conjecture for academics”',121 though useful in illuminating the purposes and limits of copyright protection as AI is increasingly employed. Nonetheless, delving into this debate is an unnecessary detour because “[t]he day sentient refugees from some intergalactic war arrive on Earth and are granted asylum in Iceland, copyright law will be the least of our problems”.122 With human-generated art being sent into space, though, the subject of protecting artists' rights (freedom of expression, attribution, etc) will increasingly abut against international treaties controlling the parameters of sending objects into and outside of our solar system, onto other planets and for display on space stations."

Monday, March 11, 2024

Japan's universities fail to make the most of intellectual property; Nikkei Asia, March 9, 2024

KENJIRO SUZUKI, Nikkei Asia; Japan's universities fail to make the most of intellectual property

"Due to lack of support, patents earn only 2% compared to U.S. schools"

Nvidia sued over AI training data as copyright clashes continue; Ars Technica, March 11, 2024

  , Ars Technica Nvidia sued over AI training data as copyright clashes continue

"Book authors are suing Nvidia, alleging that the chipmaker's AI platform NeMo—used to power customized chatbots—was trained on a controversial dataset that illegally copied and distributed their books without their consent.

In a proposed class action, novelists Abdi Nazemian (Like a Love Story), Brian Keene (Ghost Walk), and Stewart O’Nan (Last Night at the Lobster) argued that Nvidia should pay damages and destroy all copies of the Books3 dataset used to power NeMo large language models (LLMs).

The Books3 dataset, novelists argued, copied "all of Bibliotek," a shadow library of approximately 196,640 pirated books. Initially shared through the AI community Hugging Face, the Books3 dataset today "is defunct and no longer accessible due to reported copyright infringement," the Hugging Face website says.

According to the authors, Hugging Face removed the dataset last October, but not before AI companies like Nvidia grabbed it and "made multiple copies." By training NeMo models on this dataset, the authors alleged that Nvidia "violated their exclusive rights under the Copyright Act." The authors argued that the US district court in San Francisco must intervene and stop Nvidia because the company "has continued to make copies of the Infringed Works for training other models.""

Thursday, March 7, 2024

Introducing CopyrightCatcher, the first Copyright Detection API for LLMs; Patronus AI, March 6, 2024

Patronus AI; Introducing CopyrightCatcher, thefirst Copyright Detection API for LLMs

"Managing risks from unintended copyright infringement in LLM outputs should be a central focus for companies deploying LLMs in production.

  • On an adversarial copyright test designed by Patronus AI researchers, we found that state-of-the-art LLMs generate copyrighted content at an alarmingly high rate 😱
  • OpenAI’s GPT-4 produced copyrighted content on 44% of the prompts.
  • Mistral’s Mixtral-8x7B-Instruct-v0.1 produced copyrighted content on 22% of the prompts.
  • Anthropic’s Claude-2.1 produced copyrighted content on 8% of the prompts.
  • Meta’s Llama-2-70b-chat produced copyrighted content on 10% of the prompts.
  • Check out CopyrightCatcher, our solution to detect potential copyright violations in LLMs. Here’s the public demo, with open source model inference powered by Databricks Foundation Model APIs. 🔥

LLM training data often contains copyrighted works, and it is pretty easy to get an LLM to generate exact reproductions from these texts1. It is critical to catch these reproductions, since they pose significant legal and reputational risks for companies that build and use LLMs in production systems2. OpenAI, Anthropic, and Microsoft have all faced copyright lawsuits on LLM generations from authors3, music publishers4, and more recently, the New York Times5.

To check whether LLMs respond to your prompts with copyrighted text, you can use CopyrightCatcher. It detects when LLMs generate exact reproductions of content from text sources like books, and highlights any copyrighted text in LLM outputs. Check out our public CopyrightCatcher demo here!