Court Rules Against Anna’s Archive in Copyright Lawsuit; Publishers Weekly, May 21, 2026

  Jim Milliot, Publishers Weekly; Court Rules Against Anna’s Archive in Copyright Lawsuit

"Publishers scored a quick victory in their attempt to stop the pirate website Anna’s Archive from illegally copying and selling their copyrighted material.

In a decision handed down May 19, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Jed S. Rakoff issued a default judgment ordering the pirate website to immediately cease copying and distributing millions of files that it had illegally downloaded."

STEPHEN COLBERT USES COPYRIGHTED ‘PEANUTS’ MUSIC DURING FINALE: ‘I HOPE THIS DOESN’T COST CBS ANY MONEY!’; Rolling Stone, May 22, 2026

ELISABETH GARBER-PAUL , Rolling Stone; STEPHEN COLBERT USES COPYRIGHTED ‘PEANUTS’ MUSIC DURING FINALE: ‘I HOPE THIS DOESN’T COST CBS ANY MONEY!’

"During the final episode of The Late Show, host Stephen Colbert purposely used copyrighted music during a segment, a move that could potentially cost his former bosses at CBS a lot of dough if the music was unauthorized, and the usage were to end in a lawsuit.

“Peanuts is a powerful brand and corporation in and of itself. Anyone illegally using that music is going to have to pay through the nose,” he said, before addressing his band leader, Louis Cato. “Louis, Louis! Is the band right now playing the same Peanuts music I just said people were being sued for, for using without permission? Is that what you’re doing?” The band was indeed launching into the familiar Vince Guaraldi song. “Oh no, I hope this doesn’t cost CBS any money!” Colbert said."

Soundtrack to 8,000 Job Cuts: A Meta Worker’s Layoff-Themed A.I. Songs; The New York Times, May 20, 2026

Mike Isaac, The New York Times ; Soundtrack to 8,000 Job Cuts: A Meta Worker’s Layoff-Themed A.I. Songs

"If you wondered what it might be like to be laid off from a giant tech company like Meta, now you can hear it in song. And the chorus goes like this:

Meta layoff, Meta layoff

Say it like a joke

Meta layoff, Meta layoff

House of cards went broke

Listen to “Meta Layoff”

Note: This song was generated by A.I.

Those were the lyrics to an artificial-intelligence-generated song that one Meta employee created shortly before the company, which owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, laid off 8,000 workers on Wednesday — 10 percent of its work force — as it transforms itself into an A.I.-first firm."

Pa. can move ahead with broadband expansion after feds back down on wage dispute; Spotlight PA, May 21, 2026

 Charlotte Keith, Spotlight PA; Pa. can move ahead with broadband expansion after feds back down on wage dispute

"Pennsylvania can move ahead with spending more than $700 million on expanding high-speed internet in rural areas, after federal officials backed down from a threat to withhold the money because of a dispute over state labor law.

The reversal removes what could have been a major roadblock to connecting roughly 130,000 Pennsylvania homes and businesses that still can’t get broadband.

In a statement, a spokesperson for the Department of Community and Economic Development said the delay was “unfortunate” but added that the Shapiro administration insisted on “standing up for workers.”

Pennsylvania now has six months to sign contracts with the companies that will receive funding, who then must provide internet service within four years.

Most locations will be connected via fiber-optic cables, which are widely considered the fastest and most reliable internet technology.

As a result of changes made by the Trump administration, however, almost one-quarter of eligible locations will receive satellite internet, which is cheaper to install but often more expensive to subscribe to. In addition, satellite internet may not be able to keep up with future demands for faster speeds as technology evolves."

Deepfakes are testing the limits of IP law; Politico, May 21, 2026

AARON MAK , Politico; Deepfakes are testing the limits of IP law

"Nonconsensual deepfakes have become one of the most reviled applications of AI, and Congress is now looking to use the might of intellectual property law to keep them in check.

On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of lawmakers reintroduced the NO FAKES Act, which would essentially give all Americans an IP right to their voice and likeness. The act’s sponsors promote it not only as a way to protect artists and entertainers from having their creative output co-opted by AI, but as a safeguard for everyone else against pornographic deepfakes, fraudulent impersonation and a host of other ills.

NO FAKES would considerably expand the ambit of IP, which was originally aimed at incentivizing innovation and creativity. Using IP to also address issues like misinformation and sexual exploitation arguably brings this body of law into uncharted territory. Legal scholars told DFD that marshaling IP as an all-purpose shield against malicious deepfakes may have unintended consequences.

“The challenge posed by deepfakes is real, urgent and human, but not every human harm is an intellectual property harm,” said Georgetown IP law professor Madhavi Sunder. “Intellectual property can’t be everything everywhere all at once.”"

White House must comply with Presidential Records Act, judge rules; Politico, May 20, 2026

  JOSH GERSTEIN, Politico; White House must comply with Presidential Records Act, judge rules

"A federal judge has ordered aides to President Donald Trump to continue to observe the requirements of the Presidential Records Act, despite a Justice Department opinion that found the law unconstitutionally intrudes on presidential power.

In a ruling Wednesday, U.S. District Judge John Bates concluded that the 1978 statute is likely constitutional and granted a preliminary injunction that essentially nullifies the opinion issued last month by DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel."

Class Of 2026 Faces A Hard Truth: AI Isn’t The Threat—Ignoring It Is; Forbes, May 20, 2026

Tim Bajarin,, Forbes; Class Of 2026 Faces A Hard Truth: AI Isn’t The Threat—Ignoring It Is

"We moaned about the Internet when it first started, ridiculed the first smartphones and considered social media a passing fad. Yet all these technologies not only survived but thrived in a relatively short period after launch. The only commonality between them was that those who were quick to embrace the changes and learn to leverage their new capabilities came out on top – sometimes with dramatic results.

AI is no different in this respect. Only this time, the stakes are higher."

Literary Prizewinners Are Facing AI Allegations. It Feels Like the New Normal; Wired, May 19, 2026

 Miles Klee, Wired ; Literary Prizewinners Are Facing AI Allegations. It Feels Like the New Normal

Three of five regional winners of the prestigious Commonwealth Short Story Prize are suspected of relying on chatbots. They’re certainly not alone.

"AT FIRST, THE winners of the prestigious Commonwealth Short Story Prize for 2026 enjoyed the envy of their peers. But since their works of fiction earned this distinction, these authors have found themselves facing harsh scrutiny from the literary community, with several accused of enlisting generative artificial intelligence to write for them."

Elon Musk and the US government fought an AI anti-discrimination law. The arguments don’t hold up; The Guardian, May 20, 2026

 Genevieve Smith, The Guardian; Elon Musk and the US government fought an AI anti-discrimination law. The arguments don’t hold up

 "This April, the US Department of Justice joined Elon Musk’s xAI in suing the state of Colorado to kill its AI anti-discrimination law.

When the federal government sides with a billionaire against a state trying to protect its residents from AI discrimination, that’s not only a Colorado story. That’s everyone’s story.

The justice department’s lawsuit is part of a coordinated federal effort to reframe AI consumer protections as ideological overreach. In July 2025, Donald Trump signed an executive order on “preventing woke AI”, equating bias mitigation measures to a leftist “woke” agenda that suppresses free speech and truth. The federal National Policy Framework launched in March included a push to pre-empt state laws on AI, with Colorado’s law targeted. The justice department’s intervention in Colorado marks the first time the federal government has sought to intervene in a lawsuit challenging a state AI law."

A 16th-Century Sketch Claims to Depict Anne Boleyn. A.I. Says It’s Her Mom.; The New York Times, May 19, 2026

 Katherine Kornei, The New York Times; A 16th-Century Sketch Claims to Depict Anne Boleyn. A.I. Says It’s Her Mom.

Using facial-recognition technology, scholars have concluded that a 500-year-old drawing labeled “Anna Bollein Queen” more likely showed her mother, Elizabeth Howard.

"To dig into this mystery, Ms. Davies and her colleagues, including David G. Stork, a computer scientist and electrical engineer at Stanford University, turned to computational facial recognition. “This has one foot in art history and one foot in computer science,” Dr. Stork said...

Amit Roy-Chowdhury, a computer vision scientist at the University of California, Riverside, who was not involved in the research, said that facial recognition can play an important role in art history. But going forward, he added, it will be important to assemble larger training data sets of faces in artwork, as algorithms trained strictly on photographs can introduce uncertainties. And that could be a challenge, since there are millions of faces in photographs but far fewer in art. “For artwork, you don’t have that many examples,” Dr. Roy-Chowdhury said."

Book on Truth in the Age of A.I. Contains Quotes Made Up by A.I.; The New York Times, May 19, 2026

 Benjamin Mullin, The New York Times; Book on Truth in the Age of A.I. Contains Quotes Made Up by A.I.

"The author of a nonfiction book about the effects of artificial intelligence on truth acknowledged on Monday that he had included numerous made-up or misattributed quotes concocted by A.I.

The author, Steven Rosenbaum, whose book “The Future of Truth” was released this month to great fanfare, incorporated more than a half-dozen misattributed or fake quotes in sections of the book reviewed by The New York Times.

The Times asked Mr. Rosenbaum about the quotes on Sunday and Monday. On Monday night, Mr. Rosenbaum acknowledged in a statement that the book had “a handful of improperly attributed or synthetic quotes” and said that he had started his own investigation.

He said that the inclusion of the incorrect quotes was an accident and that he had “no intention of fabricating any viewpoints” while writing the book.

“As I disclosed in the book’s acknowledgments, I used A.I. tools ChatGPT and Claude during the research, writing and editing process,” Mr. Rosenbaum said in the statement. “That does not excuse these errors, of which I take full responsibility. I am now working with the editors to thoroughly review and quickly correct any affected passages; any future editions will be corrected.”

“The Future of Truth” was published by an imprint of BenBella Books and distributed by Simon and Schuster. BenBella Books, which operates independently of Simon and Schuster, did not respond to a request for comment. Simon and Schuster declined to comment."

Why College Grads Are Booing Their Commencement Speakers; The New York Times, May 18, 2026

 MICHELLE GOLDBERG , The New York Times; Why College Grads Are Booing Their Commencement Speakers

"One recent report found that only 18 percent of Gen Z-ers feel hopeful about A.I., and almost half say the risks outweigh the benefits. Politicians with followings among young people — including Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on the left and James Fishback on the right — are calling for moratoriums on data centers. A.I. is increasingly a pop culture villain. “The people who make this stuff are losers,” said the comedian Hannah Einbinder, star of HBO’s “Hacks,” a show that has put hatred of the technology at the center of its current season. There have even been some high-profile acts of anti-A.I. violence, including a Molotov cocktail hurled at the home of OpenAI’s chief, Sam Altman.

As Americans rebel against A.I., the industry’s oligarchic leaders are responding by trying to buy even more political influence, pouring money into super PACs and lobbying. Groups supporting A.I. and crypto, Politico reported this month, “are already becoming the most dominant players on the political battlefield, spending heavily for candidates on both sides of the aisle and in some cases rivaling the fund-raising of long-established party groups.” The irony is that the industry’s attempts to game the democratic system are a big part of its deep unpopularity."

The Tech Workers Building A.I. Are Scared of It, Too; The New York Times, May 18, 2026

Kate Andrias , The New York Times; The Tech Workers Building A.I. Are Scared of It, Too

"Across the tech industry, the people who understand A.I. most intimately — the ones who write its code, train its models and watch its capabilities expand in real time — are increasingly alarmed by what they are building and for whom. Some, like the Google employees, are concerned they are contributing to dangerous military developments. Others worry that A.I. poses a threat to jobs — their own, as well as in industries as far-reaching as the arts, media, law and banking. Still others are frightened by the privacy implications of the new technology.

By organizing, they are insisting that the people closest to A.I.’s development should have a voice in its direction. They can see risks before regulators, lawmakers or the public can. Listening to them is not just a matter of workplace fairness. It is essential to our society’s ability to govern the direction of A.I."

The Villain of This Year’s Commencement Speeches: A.I.; The New York Times, May 18, 2026

Andrew Ross Sorkin, Bernhard Warner, Sarah Kessler, Michael J. de la Merced, Niko Gallogly, Brian O’Keefe and Ian Mount, The New York Times; The Villain of This Year’s Commencement Speeches: A.I.

College students have interrupted graduation ceremonies to voice their fears about artificial intelligence. They’re not the only ones who are worried.

"Andrew here. If you want to understand the deep fear that artificial intelligence is creating in much of the nation, look no further than the reaction to Eric Schmidt’s commencement address. The former Google C.E.O. spoke the truth about the technology, but it did not go over well with graduates who are anxious about their future. We’ve got more below."

TEACHING AT PITT: AI v. AI — A case from the prosecution; University Times, May 15, 2026

 J. D. Wright, University Times; TEACHING AT PITT: AI v. AI — A case from the prosecution

"I’ve spent most of my career in higher education as one of the academic-integrity true believers — a zero-tolerance hardliner who prosecuted apparent violations with a zeal that might have made you wonder whether I was acting on a staunch commitment to the principles of academic honesty or just perceiving lapses in ethical judgment as personal affronts. In many ways, I’m the last person you’d expect to suggest that an enforcement-first approach to academic integrity, especially in recent years, undermines the work of teaching and learning.

And yet, here I am, making precisely that opening argument in support of my case."

How ‘learnrights’ would compensate creators for AI model training; MIT Sloan, May 12, 2026

Brian Eastwood, MIT Sloan; How ‘learnrights’ would compensate creators for AI model training

"Human content creators are protected by copyright law, in part to ensure that they’re fairly compensated for their work. 

But whether these laws allow artificial intelligence models to learn from human-created content is up for debate — both in court and on Capitol Hill. Encyclopedia Britannica’s lawsuit against OpenAI, for example, is one of the latest allegations of misuse of reference materials. Meanwhile, the U.S. Copyright Office has not made a binding determination about whether using copyrighted works to train AI models is fair use.  

To deal with these issues, in 2023 MIT Sloan School of Management professor Thomas Malone proposed “learnright” laws that would give copyright holders the exclusive right to license their content to AI companies for model training. 

“Copyright law wasn’t designed for a world with generative AI, and without something like learnright laws, the incentives for people to create new content are likely to be greatly reduced,” said Malone, who is also the director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence. 

In a more recent article, Malone and co-authors Frank Pasquale of Cornell Law School and Andrew Ting of George Washington University Law School outlined the argument for learnrights and described how they could work legally, economically, and practically...

Malone and his co-authors presented three arguments that support compensating copyright holders whose work is used to train generative AI. 

If AI models produce high-quality content quickly and cheaply without compensating the original creators of this content, that will decrease creators’ motivation to produce new content and thus reduce the volume of original work available to further improve AI models. “It would be unwise to risk such a decline in incentives for human expression,” the researchers write.

The researchers find it “troubling” that for-profit AI companies cry foul when others use their intellectual property — as was the case when U.S.-based AI firms accused China’s DeepSeek of stealing from them — given that the same companies use copyrighted content without compensating its creators. 

Properly acknowledging how other works influenced one’s own is the right thing to do and the foundation of a thoughtful creative process, the researchers write. Conversely, uncredited and uncompensated use of others’ work falls short of ethical standards and undermines what IP protection is supposed to mean."

AI won’t replace lawyers. It will create more of them.; The Washington Post, May 17, 2026

Damien Charlotin , The Washington Post; AI won’t replace lawyers. It will create more of them.

"The replacement story often rests on a particular picture of what a lawyer does: reading documents, applying rules and producing text. Since AI can read, apply rules and produce text, the argument goes, lawyers are cooked. That picture is not entirely wrong, but it is the perception engineers have always had of the legal domain: Feed in the facts, apply the rule, return the output. Yet the reason lawyers exist (and command high prices for their services) is that law is shot through with ambiguity. If the rules ran themselves, no one would need us. Every step in the chain — reading, applying, producing — involves choices, some of which are genuinely difficult.

A better way to think about jobs is as bundles of tasks. Some bundles are loose: A job composed of a handful of discrete, repetitive, well-specified tasks can be peeled apart and the tasks automated one by one. Other bundles are tight, because the tasks reinforce one another and cannot be cleanly separated. The key example here is offered by radiologists, long predicted to be facing extinction due to AI. Despite the dire forecasts, their numbers keep growing, and they keep commanding ever-higher salaries.

Legal work is also hard to neatly separate. For instance, doing legal research and evaluating an argument are, for an experienced lawyer, often the same mental activity: A lawyer checks the argument by writing it. Pull those tasks apart, hand the writing to a machine, and verification suddenly becomes a separate, deliberate, expensive act — at least if you want to avoid landing in my database of courts sanctioning parties for filing “hallucinated” material. In fact, an irony is that automating the easy parts of a job often makes the hard parts harder, not easier."

Lawmakers push for AI data center moratoriums as more states consider projects; Deseret News, May 15, 2026

Cami Mondeaux , Deseret News; Lawmakers push for AI data center moratoriums as more states consider projects

"A pair of progressive lawmakers in Congress are teaming up to push for a moratorium on the construction of AI data centers until nationwide safeguards are put in place — dividing members of their party as more states consider projects of their own. 

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., introduced the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Data Center Moratorium Act in March, seeking a federal suspension of data center construction until national protections are put in place. Those protections, they say, should include assurances that the economic gains of centers will benefit workers rather than just Big Tech owners, the centers will not increase electricity or utility prices, or that construction will not harm surrounding communities or the environment.

AI and robotics are creating the most sweeping technological revolution in the history of humanity. The scale, scope and speed of that change is unprecedented,” Sanders said in a statement at the time. “Bottom line: We cannot sit back and allow a handful of billionaire Big Tech oligarchs to make decisions that will reshape our economy, our democracy and the future of humanity. We need serious public debate and democratic oversight over this enormously consequential issue.”...

Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia called the proposal “idiocy” when asked about a federal moratorium during an Axios summit in March. Warner warned that putting a pause on data center projects in the United States would only give adversarial nations such as China an advantage...

The debate comes as more states consider their own projects, including Utah, which just approved the construction of an AI data center in Box Elder County. That project has elicited widespread protests and pushback from opponents who worry the facility would threaten water resources in the area, particularly with the shrinking Great Salt Lake."

Law Schools Implement AI to Focus on Ethics and Technology; Los Angeles Times, May 17, 2026

 David Nusbaum, Los Angeles Times; Law Schools Implement AI to Focus on Ethics and Technology

"Over the last two years, Loyola Law School in Downtown Los Angeles has incorporated AI into six courses. It’s a sign of a growing trend where law firms are looking for attorneys who can utilize the technology to improve efficiency. While law schools have constantly looked to update coursework to keep curriculum updated as laws are updated, the application of generative AI to the practice of law is the biggest change that has happened in generations, according to Rebecca Delfino, associate professor of law at Loyola Law School...

Delfino is one of several professors who have integrated AI into their coursework. She is involved with two courses specifically focused on the ethical implications of generative AI and the legal practice.

In a first-year civil procedure course, students are divided in half, with one group an analog approach that relies on textbooks and class notes while the other half uses generative AI technology. The results are compared to see where the technology is effective and ineffective. The goal is to use AI as something that is additive rather than giving over too much authority and power, according to Delfino. For many exercises, there are six or seven AI models that are tested and compared.

Students understand that they need the AI skill set to make themselves a more attractive candidate, no matter what area of law they practice. It can be used to draft documents, conduct legal research and assist with discovery. Chatbots are tested for hallucinations, and the drawbacks are identified."

What A.I. Did to My College Class; The New York Times, May 17, 2026

  Theo Baker, The New York Times; What A.I. Did to My College Class

"Stanford has always been a haven for aspiring techies, but recent events have taken the school into uncharted territory. A.I. is everything. We talk about it at the dining halls and in history classes, on dates and while smoking with friends, at the gym and in communal dorm bathrooms. Nearly all of higher education has been overtaken by this technology, and Stanford is a case study in how far it can go. For the past four years, my classmates and I have been the subjects of a high-stakes experiment.

We are the first college class of the A.I. era — ChatGPT arrived on campus about two months after we did. When we graduate next month, this technology will have altered our lives in very different ways. For some, it has opened the door to staggering wealth. But for many who came to Stanford — just four years ago! — when a degree seemed like a guaranteed ticket to a high-paying job, the door has been slammed shut. For all of us, A.I. has permanently changed how we think and behave."

Building intellectual property awareness across disciplines at Illinois State University; Illinois State University News, May 11, 2026

Sara Prieto , Illinois State University News; Building intellectual property awareness across disciplines at Illinois State University

[Kip Currier: It's impressive to see how diverse fields at Illinois State University -- Family and Consumer Sciences, Information Technology, Management, etc. -- are imbuing students with practical knowledge about creating, protecting, and using IP.]

"Understanding how to protect original work is becoming an essential part of the student experience. At Illinois State University, a second faculty cohort expanded the integration of intellectual property (IP) into course work during the 2025-26 academic year...

Across disciplines, students learned to treat their work as something that can be developed, protected, and applied beyond the classroom. The program positions intellectual property as a practical skill, especially as tools like AI make it easier to create and share content while raising new questions about ownership."

Should AI designs be eligible for Iowa State Fair's T-shirt contest?; Des Moines Register, May 17, 2026

Lucia Cheng , Des Moines Register; Should AI designs be eligible for Iowa State Fair's T-shirt contest?

"Should people be able to use generative AI to win a design contest?

That's the debate playing out on social media after the Iowa State Fair's Blue Ribbon Foundation unveiled the finalists for its annual T-shirt design contest."

On the “Superior Ethical Criterion” for Assessing AI’s Benefits and Risks; Santa Clara Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, May 16, 2026

Irina Raicu , Santa Clara Markkula Center for Applied Ethics; On the “Superior Ethical Criterion” for Assessing AI’s Benefits and Risks

"Then, in December, Pope Leo addressed participants in a conference titled “Artificial Intelligence and Care for Our Common Home.” The Vatican News covered that address:

The ability to access vast amounts of data and information should not be confused with the ability to derive meaning and value from it,’ the Pope explained, adding that ‘The latter requires a willingness to confront the mystery and core questions of our existence, even when these realities are often marginalized or ridiculed by the prevailing cultural and economic models.’

The call to confront “the mystery and core questions of our existence” reminds us of all the knowledge we still don't have, at least not in a quantifiable, data-based format. It is also a reminder of the limitations of the role of technology, even very powerful technology, in the search for meaning and in the "integral development of human beings and society." Discussing those limitations, pushing back against some of the claims by even the best-intentioned technologists, is an important part of placing AI at the service of human beings, rather than the other way around."

Lilian Doan Davis, Polsinelli PC,  The National Law Review; Who Owns AI-Generated Content? Human Authorship Still Controls, and Documenting the Creation Process Is Critical

"Practical Steps Companies Should Consider Now

Businesses using generative AI should consider a few immediate steps:

• Document human creative input. Preserve drafts, edits, source files and records showing who selected, arranged, revised or transformed AI outputs.
• Do not assume prompting establishes ownership. Prompt logs may help show process, but they are not a substitute for evidence of human-authored expression.
• Be precise in registration strategy. Applicants should disclose AI-generated material where required, identify the human author’s contribution and claim only the human-authored portions.
• Revisit contracts and internal policies. Vendor agreements, employee policies and content-development protocols should not assume that all AI-assisted output is fully protectable or exclusively owned in the same way as traditionally authored material.

Bottom Line

The law remains grounded in conventional copyright principles. The Copyright Office’s recent guidance and the D.C. Circuit’s decision in Thaler point in the same direction: copyright protection still turns on human authorship, even when AI is part of the process.

For businesses, the practical implication is not simply that some AI-generated works may be unprotectable. It is that ownership, registration and enforcement may depend on whether the company can later show what a human author actually contributed. In that sense, AI governance is also evidence governance."

What Are Your Company’s AI Nightmares?; Harvard Business Review, May 11, 2026

Reid Blackman, Harvard Business Review; What Are Your Company’s AI Nightmares?

"Before generative AI burst onto the scene in late 2022, companies took a more or less standard approach to managing the risks introduced by AI: They developed AI ethical risk (or Responsible AI or AI Governance) programs. These programs were designed by executives and focused primarily on writing and implementing enterprise-wide AI policies that are meant to explain how the organization will live up to its AI ethics values (or principles or pillars, as they are also called). When generative AI showed up, organizations updated their programs to accommodate the new technology. Now that AI agents are gaining traction, most will likely try to update yet again.

That would be a mistake. The standard approach to Responsible AI is fundamentally broken. 

I do not come to this conclusion lightly. It is the result of, first, seeing how the AI landscape has evolved in ways that create a diabolically complex risk landscape, and second, spending nearly a decade working with Fortune 500 companies across healthcare, pharmaceuticals, insurance, financial services, entertainment, and more to design and implement AI ethical risk programs. I’ve also worked in an advisory capacity with three of the largest consultancies in the world. I’ve had countless closed-door conversations with other leaders in the AI governance space.

The standard approach is too slow, too vague, and too hard to communicate. Instead of focusing on values and policy, companies would be better served by focusing on their worst-case scenarios—their AI ethical nightmares. That’s because this focus allows them to apply a novel, rapidly implementable approach that works for everything from narrow AI to governing AI agents."

Anthropic’s $1.5B copyright settlement is getting messy as judge delays approval; Ars Technica, May 15, 2026

ASHLEY BELANGER  , Ars Technica; Anthropic’s $1.5B copyright settlement is getting messy as judge delays approval

"After several authors and class members raised objections to Anthropic’s $1.5 billion settlement over its widespread book piracy to train AI, a federal judge has delayed final approvals of the settlement.

On Thursday, US District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin declined to rubber-stamp what’s regarded as the largest copyright settlement in US history. Instead, she wanted to better understand why some class members were objecting and opting out of the settlement. So, she asked authors to address key concerns of objectors, who argued that lawyers’ compensation was way too high and payments to class members were a “pittance.”...

Objectors may not win every fight, but they have seemingly persuaded the court to at least entertain their strongly worded pleas, including warnings that the settlement may not survive an appeal if the terms aren’t re-examined. Notably, their objections came shortly before a group of 25 class members opting out of the settlement filed a new lawsuit, showing that Anthropic is not done fighting these claims.

“For the Court to agree that counsel’s request of nearly a third of a billion dollars, while individual plaintiffs settle for a pittance of available compensation and no protections against future abuse is an aberration of civil justice and a slap in the face to all those who labored to publish their works,” Story said. “Such a decision would also further the too-often-observed stereotype that … class-action Plaintiffs are merely tools used to obtain Powerball-size payouts to attorneys.”

Judge William Alsup, who initially approved the settlement but has since retired, also questioned whether the lawyers’ fees were too high. Worried that the settlement was being “shoved down the throat of authors,” he recommended an independent investigation to ensure no improper attorneys’ fees would be granted, but according to Lea Bishop, a non-class member objector and professor of copyright law, the recommendation “was not squarely disclosed to incoming Judge Martinez-Olguin” in a status report submitted by authors’ lawyers. Additionally, class members weren’t notified of the investigation.

Authors must respond to objections raised by May 21, when Anthropic will also have to file a brief explaining “why late opt outs should not be honored,” the judge ordered."

Movers & Shakers 2026; Library Journal, May 4, 2026

  Lisa Peet, Library Journal; Movers & Shakers 2026

"LJ’s Movers & Shakers awards turn 25 this year, a full quarter-century of celebrating great work happening in the library field. The production of the annual issue always feels like a good opportunity for reflection on the preceding 12 months—more so than New Year’s Day or a birthday (although this year, the occasion of LJ’s 150th birthday may be an exception). It’s a moment to wonder not just how we’re all doing, but: Are we OK?

Judging by this year’s class of Movers, the answer would be an affirmative Yes.

Last year marked what felt like a period of great uncertainty and destabilization, and in many ways it continues to be. While the existence of the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) is now legally protected, the Trump administration’s federal budget seeks to zero out its funding. And across the country, libraries of all types have seen revenues cut, threats to the immigrant communities they serve, and state lawmakers challenging patrons’ freedom to read.

But libraries are meeting these challenges, in large and small and often unexpected ways. As LJ Editorial Director Hallie Rich points out in this month’s editorial, leadership takes many forms, some of it under the radar. Which is all the more reason to put together a feature like Movers & Shakers every year and shine a light on the ways—often simple (but not easy), often incremental, nearly always rooted in great care and concern—that library workers are supporting their communities. They are getting kids enthused about reading, safeguarding government data, providing options for justice-impacted individuals, ensuring diversity in collections, standing up to censorship, helping people find their roots, organizing clubs to bring people together, welcoming new Americans, and more. If this small sampling of creative and compassionate work being done to meet the moment is any indication, we are very much OK."

A Seat at the Table: Reflections from eight ALA trailblazers; American Libraries, May 1, 2026

 Anne Ford , American Libraries; A Seat at the Table: Reflections from eight ALA trailblazers

"For 150 years, the American Library Association (ALA) has shaped the landscape of libraries and the profession itself—but its leadership has often reflected the racial and gender biases of society at large. For this special anniversary issue, American Libraries spoke with eight barrier-busting Association leaders about their struggles, triumphs, breakdowns, and breakthroughs. The stories and lessons they share reveal how diversity fuels and transforms the power of libraries everywhere."

Authors, publishers near final approval of $1.5 billion Anthropic copyright settlement; Courthouse News Service, May 14, 2026

MARGARET ATTRIDGE  , Courthouse News Service; Authors, publishers near final approval of $1.5 billion Anthropic copyright settlement

"Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín, a Joe Biden appointee, allowed objectors to address the court, where several spoke about the concerns they had with how the plaintiffs put together the eligible works list.

One class member told the judge that the works list undercounts the number of eligible works in the class by treating each copyright registration number as a single work, regardless of how many books are covered by the registration. The class member explained that she has certain group copyright registration numbers that include 40 separate, independently published novels under one registration number, all of which were downloaded by Anthropic without permission. However, under the current terms of the settlement agreement, the novels would be considered just one claimable work.

Another class member spoke to the exclusion of works that were published under a pseudonym, disadvantageous to small publishers and self-published authors in the class, while a third said they believed a one-time payment was not enough because Anthropic was continuing to profit off the copyrighted work they stole.

James H. Bartolomei III of Duncan Firm, an attorney representing four other objectors, asked the court to reopen the opt-out period as certain key documents from the case were only uploaded to the settlement website recently.

“Nothing I am asking for takes a dollar away from any class member who filed a claim. I’m not asking the court to stop the settlement from ever being approved. Just for sufficient information to make an informed choice,” he said."