Disney, Universal File First Major Studio Lawsuit Against AI Company, Sue Midjourney for Copyright Infringement: ‘This Is Theft’; Variety, June 11, 2025

 Todd Spangler, Variety; Disney, Universal File First Major Studio Lawsuit Against AI Company, Sue Midjourney for Copyright Infringement: ‘This Is Theft’

"Disney and NBCU filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday against Midjourney, a generative AI start-up, alleging copyright infringement. The companies alleged that Midjourney’s own website “displays hundreds, if not thousands, of images generated by its Image Service at the request of its subscribers that infringe Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works.”

A copy of the lawsuit is at this link...

Disney and NBCU’s lawsuit includes images alleged to be examples of instances of Midjourney’s infringement. Those include an image of Marvel’s Deadpool and Wolverine (pictured above), Iron Man, Spider-Man, the Hulk and more; Star Wars’ Darth Vader, Yoda, R2-D2, C-3PO and Chewbacca; Disney’s Princess Elsa and Olaf from “Frozen”; characters from “The Simpsons”; Pixar’s Buzz Lightyear from “Toy Story” and Lightning McQueen from “Cars”; DreamWorks’ “How to Train Your Dragon”; and Universal‘s “Shrek” and the yellow Minions from the “Despicable Me” film franchise."

Getty argues its landmark UK copyright case does not threaten AI; Reuters, June 9, 2025

Sam Tobin, Reuters; Getty argues its landmark UK copyright case does not threaten AI

 "Getty Images' landmark copyright lawsuit against artificial intelligence company Stability AI began at London's High Court on Monday, with Getty rejecting Stability AI's contention the case posed a threat to the generative AI industry.

Seattle-based Getty, which produces editorial content and creative stock images and video, accuses Stability AI of using its images to "train" its Stable Diffusion system, which can generate images from text inputs...

Creative industries are grappling with the legal and ethical implications of AI models that can produce their own work after being trained on existing material. Prominent figures including Elton John have called for greater protections for artists.

Lawyers say Getty's case will have a major impact on the law, as well as potentially informing government policy on copyright protections relating to AI."

UK government signals it will not force tech firms to disclose how they train AI; The Guardian, June 6, 2025

Eleni Courea and Dan Milmo, The Guardian ; UK government signals it will not force tech firms to disclose how they train AI

"Opponents of the plans have warned that even if the attempts to insert clauses into the data bill fail, the government could be challenged in the courts over the proposed changes.

The consultation on copyright changes, which is due to produce its findings before the end of the year, contains four options: to let AI companies use copyrighted work without permission, alongside an option for artists to “opt out” of the process; to leave the situation unchanged; to require AI companies to seek licences for using copyrighted work; and to allow AI firms to use copyrighted work with no opt-out for creative companies and individuals.

The technology secretary, Peter Kyle, has said the copyright-waiver-plus-opt-out scenario is no longer the government’s preferred option, but Kidron’s amendments have attempted to head off that option by effectively requiring tech companies to seek licensing deals for any content that they use to train their AI models."

How AI and copyright turned into a political nightmare for Labour; Politico.eu, June 4, 2025

JOSEPH BAMBRIDGE , Politico.eu; How AI and copyright turned into a political nightmare for Labour

"The Data (Use and Access Bill) has ricocheted between the Commons and the Lords in an extraordinarily long incidence of ping-pong, with both Houses digging their heels in and a frenzied lobbying battle on all sides."

AI firms say they can’t respect copyright. These researchers tried.; The Washington Post, June 5, 2025

Analysis by Nitasha Tiku 

with research by 

Andrea Jiménez

 and 

Will Oremus

, The Washington Post; AI firms say they can’t respect copyright. These researchers tried.

"A group of more than two dozen AI researchers have found that they could build a massive eight-terabyte dataset using only text that was openly licensed or in public domain. They tested the dataset quality by using it to train a 7 billion parameter language model, which performed about as well as comparable industry efforts, such as Llama 2-7B, which Meta released in 2023.

A paper published Thursday detailing their effort also reveals that the process was painstaking, arduous and impossible to fully automate.

The group built an AI model that is significantly smaller than the latest offered by OpenAI’s ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini, but their findings appear to represent the biggest, most transparent and rigorous effort yet to demonstrate a different way of building popular AI tools.

That could have implications for the policy debate swirling around AI and copyright.

The paper itself does not take a position on whether scraping text to train AI is fair use.

That debate has reignited in recent weeks with a high-profile lawsuit and dramatic turns around copyright law and enforcement in both the U.S. and U.K."

 

The AI copyright standoff continues - with no solution in sight; BBC, June 2, 2025

Zoe Kleinman, BBC ; The AI copyright standoff continues - with no solution in sight

"The fierce battle over artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright - which pits the government against some of the biggest names in the creative industry - returns to the House of Lords on Monday with little sign of a solution in sight.

A huge row has kicked off between ministers and peers who back the artists, and shows no sign of abating. 

It might be about AI but at its heart are very human issues: jobs and creativity.

It's highly unusual that neither side has backed down by now or shown any sign of compromise; in fact if anything support for those opposing the government is growing rather than tailing off."

U.S. Copyright Office Shocks Big Tech With AI Fair Use Rebuke; Forbes, May 29, 2025

Tor Constantino, MBA

, Forbes; U.S. Copyright Office Shocks Big Tech With AI Fair Use Rebuke

 "The U.S. Copyright Office released its long-awaited report on generative AI training and copyright infringement on May 9, just one day after President Trump abruptly fired Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden. Within 48 hours, Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter was also reportedly out, after the agency rushed to publish a “pre-publication version” of its guidance — suggesting urgency, if not outright alarm, within the office.

This timing was no coincidence. “We practitioners were anticipating this report and knew it was being finalized, but its release was a surprise,” said Yelena Ambartsumian, an AI governance and IP lawyer and founder of Ambart Law. “The fact that it dropped as a pre-publication version, the day after the librarian was fired, signals to me that the Copyright Office expected its own leadership to be next.”

At the center of the report is a sharply contested issue: whether using copyrighted works to train AI models qualifies as “fair use.” And the office’s position is a bold departure from the narrative that major AI companies like OpenAI and Google have relied on in court...

The office stopped short of declaring that all AI training is infringement. Instead, it emphasized that each case must be evaluated on its specific facts — a reminder that fair use remains a flexible doctrine, not a blanket permission slip."

It’s too expensive to fight every AI copyright battle, Getty CEO says; Ars Technica, May 28, 2025

 ASHLEY BELANGER , Ars Technica; It’s too expensive to fight every AI copyright battle, Getty CEO says

[Kip Currier: As of May 2025, New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) data values Getty Images at nearly three-quarters of a billion dollars.

So it's noteworthy and should give individual creators pause that even a company of that size is publicly acknowledging the financial realities of copyright litigation against AI tech companies like Stability AI.

Even if the courts should determine that AI tech companies can prevail on fair use grounds against copyright infringement claims, isn't there something fundamentally unfair and unethical about AI tech oligarchs being able to devour and digest everyone else's copyrighted works, and then alchemize that improperly-taken aggregation of creativity into new IP works that they can monetize, with no recompense given to the original creators?

Just because someone can do something, doesn't mean they should be able to do it.

AI tech company leaders like Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Mark Zuckerberg et al would never stand for similar uses of their works without permission or compensation. 

Neither should creators. Quid pulchrum est (What's fair is fair).

If the courts do side with AI tech companies, new federal legislation may need to be enacted to provide protections for content creators from the AI tech companies that want and need their content to power up novel iterations of their AI tools via ever-increasing amounts of training data. 

In the current Congress, that's not likely to happen. But it may be possible after 2026 or 2028. If enough content creators make their voices heard through their grassroots advocacy and votes at the ballot box.]

[Excerpt]

"On Bluesky, a trial lawyer, Max Kennerly, effectively satirized Clegg and the whole AI industry by writing, "Our product creates such little value that it is simply not viable in the marketplace, not even as a niche product. Therefore, we must be allowed to unilaterally extract value from the work of others and convert that value into our profits."

The Copyright Office’s Report on AI Training Material and Fair Use: Will It Stymie the U.S. AI Industry?; The Federalist Society, May 29, 2025

John Blanton Farmer  , The Federalist Society ; The Copyright Office’s Report on AI Training Material and Fair Use: Will It Stymie the U.S. AI Industry?

"Will the Trump Administration Withdraw the Report?

The Trump Administration might withdraw this report.

The Trump Administration is friendlier to the U.S. AI industry than the Biden Administration was. Shortly after taking office, it rescinded a Biden Administration executive order on the development and use of AI, which was restrictive and burdensome.

The day before the report was released, the Trump Administration fired the head of the Library of Congress, which oversees the USCO. The day after the report was issued, it fired the head of the USCO. The administration didn’t comment on whether these firings were related to the report.

The USCO may have rushed out the report to prevent the Trump Administration from meddling with it. The version released was labeled a “pre-publication version.” It’s unusual to release a non-final version.

This report is not the law. Courts will decide this fair use issue. They’ll certainly consider this report, but they aren’t bound to follow it."

'Criminal': Elton John condemns UK's AI copyright plans; Reuters, May 18, 2025

 Reuters; 'Criminal': Elton John condemns UK's AI copyright plans

"The biggest names in the industry, including John, Paul McCartney, Andrew Lloyd Webber, Ed Sheeran and others, have urged the government to change course, saying the proposal will make it even harder for young people to make a living in the creative industries.

"The danger is for young artists, they haven't got the resources to keep checking or fight big tech," John told the BBC. "It's criminal and I feel incredibly betrayed.""

Trump strikes a blow for AI – by firing the US copyright supremo; The Guardian, May 13, 2025

 Blake Montgomery , The Guardian; Trump strikes a blow for AI – by firing the US copyright supremo

"Over the weekend, Donald Trump fired the head of the US copyright office, CBS News reported. Register of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter, was sacked after she issued a report questioning AI companies’ growing need for more data and casting doubt on their expressed need to circumvent current copyright laws.

In a statement, New York Democratic representative Joe Morelle pointed specifically to Trump’s booster-in-chief Elon Musk as a motivator for Perlmutter’s firing: “Donald Trump’s termination of register of copyrights, Shira Perlmutter, is a brazen, unprecedented power grab with no legal basis. It is surely no coincidence he acted less than a day after she refused to rubber-stamp Elon Musk’s efforts to mine troves of copyrighted works to train AI models.”

Trump’s abrupt severing of the copyright chief from her job reminds me of the Gordian knot. Legend has it that Alexander the Great was presented with a knot in a rope tying a cart to a stake. So complex were its twistings that no man had been able to untie it of the hundreds who had tried. Alexander silently drew his sword and sliced the knot in two. The story is one of a great man demonstrating the ingenuity that would lead him to conquer the world. Alexander did solve the riddle. He also defeated its purpose. The cart is left with no anchor. Perhaps the riddle had taken on more significance than the original problem of keeping the cart in place, but that is a question for another day.

Trump may have cut through any thorny legal questions the copyright office had raised, but the vacuum at the head of the US’s copyright authority means that richer and better-connected players will run roughshod over copyright law in the course of their business. That may be what the president wants. The more powerful players in lawsuits over AI and copyright are undoubtedly the well capitalized AI companies, as much as I want artists to be paid in abundance for their creativity. These tech companies have cozied up to Trump in an effort to ensure a friendlier regulatory environment, which seems to be working if the firing of the copyright chief is any evidence. Lawsuits over how much AI companies owe artists and publishers for their surreptitious use of copyrighted material with an avowed lack of permission still abound, and both plaintiffs and defendants will be taking their cues from the US copyright office."

Opt out or get scraped: UK’s AI copyright shake-up has Elton John, Dua Lipa fighting back; CNBC, May 12, 2025

Ryan Browne , CNBC; Opt out or get scraped: UK’s AI copyright shake-up has Elton John, Dua Lipa fighting back

"Celebrity musicians from Elton John to Dua Lipa are urging the U.K. government to rethink controversial plans to reform copyright laws that allow artificial intelligence developers access to rights-protected content.

An open letter signed by John, Lipa and a host of other high-profile artists, this weekend called on Prime Minister Keir Starmer to back an amendment proposed by U.K. lawmaker Beeban Kidron to make the legal framework around AI model makers’ use of copyrighted content more strict.

“We are wealth creators, we reflect and promote the national stories, we are the innovators of the future, and AI needs us as much as it needs energy and computer skills,” they said in the letter.

“We will lose an immense growth opportunity if we give our work away at the behest of a handful of powerful overseas tech companies.”"

US Copyright Office found AI companies sometimes breach copyright. Next day its boss was fired; The Register, May 12, 2025

Simon Sherwood, The Register; US Copyright Office found AI companies sometimes breach copyright. Next day its boss was fired

"The head of the US Copyright Office has reportedly been fired, the day after agency concluded that builders of AI models use of copyrighted material went beyond existing doctrines of fair use.

The office’s opinion on fair use came in a draft of the third part of its report on copyright and artificial intelligence. The first part considered digital replicas and the second tackled whether it is possible to copyright the output of generative AI.

The office published the draft [PDF] of Part 3, which addresses the use of copyrighted works in the development of generative AI systems, on May 9th.

The draft notes that generative AI systems “draw on massive troves of data, including copyrighted works” and asks: “Do any of the acts involved require the copyright owners’ consent or compensation?”"

Trump fires Copyright Office director after report raises questions about AI training; TechCrunch, May 11, 2025

Anthony Ha , TechCrunch; Trump fires Copyright Office director after report raises questions about AI training

"As for how this ties into Musk (a Trump ally) and AI, Morelle linked to a pre-publication version of a U.S. Copyright Office report released this week that focuses on copyright and artificial intelligence. (In fact, it’s actually part three of a longer report.)

In it, the Copyright Office says that while it’s “not possible to prejudge” the outcome of individual cases, there are limitations on how much AI companies can count on “fair use” as a defense when they train their models on copyrighted content. For example, the report says research and analysis would probably be allowed.

“But making commercial use of vast troves of copyrighted works to produce expressive content that competes with them in existing markets, especially where this is accomplished through illegal access, goes beyond established fair use boundaries,” it continues.

The Copyright Office goes on to suggest that government intervention “would be premature at this time,” but it expresses hope that “licensing markets” where AI companies pay copyright holders for access to their content “should continue to develop,” adding that “alternative approaches such as extended collective licensing should be considered to address any market failure.”

AI companies including OpenAI currently face a number of lawsuits accusing them of copyright infringement, and OpenAI has also called for the U.S. government to codify a copyright strategy that gives AI companies leeway through fair use.

Musk, meanwhile, is both a co-founder of OpenAI and of a competing startup, xAI (which is merging with the former Twitter). He recently expressed support for Square founder Jack Dorsey’s call to “delete all IP law.”"

Meta lawsuit poses first big test of AI copyright battle; Financial Times, May 1, 2025

Cristina Criddle and Hannah Murphy, Financial Times; Meta lawsuit poses first big test of AI copyright battle

 "The case, which has been brought by about a dozen authors including Ta-Nehisi Coates and Richard Kadrey, is centred on the $1.4tn social media giant’s use of LibGen, a so-called shadow library of millions of books, academic articles and comics, to train its Llama AI models. The ruling will have wide-reaching implications in the fierce copyright battle between artists and AI groups and is one of several lawsuits around the world that allege technology groups are using content without permission."

Copyright alone cannot protect the future of creative work; Brookings, May 1, 2025

Mark MacCarthy , Brookings; Copyright alone cannot protect the future of creative work

"AI-generated content is nowhere near as good today as the output of skilled journalists, scriptwriters, videographers, photographers, commercial designers, and other creative workers. But the AI technology is getting there. Content producers will soon be able to use AI systems to generate at least some content that used to be generated without any AI assistance. Prompt engineers will work together with traditional content creators to guide new systems of content production. The promise of the new technology is that this output will be satisfactory and maybe even superior for a wide variety of purposes at a fraction of the cost."

Ministers to amend data bill amid artists’ concerns over AI and copyright; The Guardian, April 30, 2025

 Eleni Courea and Dan Milmo , The Guardian; Ministers to amend data bill amid artists’ concerns over AI and copyright

"Ministers have drawn up concessions on copyright changes in an attempt to appease artists and creators before a crucial vote in parliament next week, the Guardian has learned.

The government will promise to carry out an economic impact assessment of its proposed copyright changes and to publish reports on issues including transparency, licensing and access to data for AI developers.

The concessions are designed to mollify concerns in parliament and in creative industries about the government’s proposed shake-up of copyright rules."

Jack Dorsey Says Intellectual Property Law Shouldn't Exist, and Elon Musk Agrees: 'Delete All IP Law'; Entrepreneur, April 14, 2025

SHERIN SHIBU EDITED BY MELISSA MALAMUT  , Entrepreneur; Jack Dorsey Says Intellectual Property Law Shouldn't Exist, and Elon Musk Agrees: 'Delete All IP Law'

"While Dorsey may want to end intellectual property law, copyright holders are still holding on to their work. Dozens of cases have been filed over the past few years in U.S. federal court against AI companies like OpenAI, Google, and Meta, as authors, artists, and news organizations accuse these companies of using their copyrighted work to train AI models without credit or compensation.

AI needs ample training material to keep it sharp. It took about 300 billion words to train ChatGPT, an AI chatbot now used by over 500 million people weekly. AI image generator DALL·E 2 needed "hundreds of millions of captioned images from the internet" to become operational."

Creators Are Losing the AI Copyright Battle. We Have to Keep Fighting (Guest Column); The Hollywood Reporter, April 16, 2025

Ed Newton-Rex ; Creators Are Losing the AI Copyright Battle. We Have to Keep Fighting (Guest Column)

"The struggle between AI companies and creatives around “training data” — or what you and I would refer to as people’s life’s work — may be the defining struggle of this generation for the media industries. AI companies want to exploit creators’ work without paying them, using it to train AI models that compete with those creators; creators and rights holders are doing everything they can to stop them."

The real argument artists should be making against AI; Vox, April 16, 2025

 Sigal Samuel, Vox; The real argument artists should be making against AI

[Paywall to access]