From CLICK to CRIME: investigating intellectual property crime in the digital age; Europol, October 2025

Europol; From CLICK to CRIME: investigating intellectual property crime in the digital age

"A new wave of online crime is putting consumers, businesses, and the wider economy at risk - from fake medicines and forged wine to illegal streaming platforms. The increase in counterfeit goods and the criminal abuse of intellectual property affect our daily lives more than many realise, with consequences that go far beyond lost revenue.

The conference “From CLICK to CRIME: Investigating Intellectual Property Crime in the Digital Age” was held on 22 and 23 October 2025 in Sofia, Bulgaria. Jointly organised by Europol, the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Bulgaria’s General Directorate Combating Organised Crime (GDBOP), the event highlighted the vital importance of collaboration in tackling online crime. The participants reaffirmed the importance of strong collective efforts in tackling online-enabled intellectual property crime to protect consumers, safeguard creativity and uphold trust in the digital economy.

Consider a few key examples of the major threats posed by intellectual property crime:

• Illegal streaming and sharing platforms not only drain the cinema, publishing, musical and software industries but also expose viewers, especially children, to unregulated and potentially harmful content.
• Fake pharmaceuticals, supplements and illicit doping substances, promoted on social media and websites, are produced in clandestine labs without testing or quality control. Dangerous products, circulating in gyms and among amateur athletes, can cause severe or even fatal health effects.
• Counterfeit toys, perfumes, and cosmetics are also trafficked online and carry hidden dangers, trading low prices for high risks to health and safety.

Behind many of these schemes are well-structured organised criminal networks that view intellectual property crime not as a secondary activity, but as a lucrative business model."

The platform exposing exactly how much copyrighted art is used by AI tools; The Guardian, October 18, 2025

 Dan Milmo , The Guardian; The platform exposing exactly how much copyrighted art is used by AI tools

"The US tech platform Vermillio tracks use of a client’s intellectual property online and claims it is possible to trace, approximately, the percentage to which an AI generated image has drawn on pre-existing copyrighted material."

OpenAI Blocks Videos of Martin Luther King Jr. After Racist Depictions; The New York Times, October 17, 2025

Claire Moses, The New York Times ; OpenAI Blocks Videos of Martin Luther King Jr. After Racist Depictions

[Kip Currier: This latest tech company debacle is another example of breakdowns in technology design thinking and ethical leadership. No one in all of OpenAI could foresee that Sora 2.0 might be used in these ways? Or they did but didn't care? Either way, this is morally reckless and/or negligent conduct.

The leaders and design folks at OpenAI (and other tech companies) would be well-advised to look at Tool 6 in An Ethical Toolkit for Engineering/Design Practice, created by Santa Clara University Markkula Center for Applied Ethics:

Tool 6: Think About the Terrible People: Positive thinking about our work, as Tool 5 reminds us, is an important part of ethical design. But we must not envision our work being used only by the wisest and best people, in the wisest and best ways. In reality, technology is power, and there will always be those who wish to abuse that power. This tool helps design teams to manage the risks associated with technology abuse.

https://www.scu.edu/ethics-in-technology-practice/ethical-toolkit/

The "Move Fast and Break Things" ethos is alive and well in Big Tech.]

[Excerpt]

"OpenAI said Thursday that it was blocking people from creating videos using the image of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. with its Sora app after users created vulgar and racist depictions of him.

The company said it had made the decision at the request of the King Center as well as Dr. Bernice King, the civil rights leader’s daughter, who had objected to the videos.

The announcement was another effort by OpenAI to respond to criticism of its tools, which critics say operate with few safeguards.

“Some users generated disrespectful depictions of Dr. King’s image,” OpenAI said in a statement. “OpenAI has paused generations depicting Dr. King as it strengthens guardrails for historical figures.”"

Can You Trademark Peanut Butter and Jelly? Smucker’s Says Yes.; The New York Times, October 17, 2025

 Yan Zhuang, The New York Times; Can You Trademark Peanut Butter and Jelly? Smucker’s Says Yes.

 "J.M. Smucker, the maker of Uncrustables, is suing Trader Joe’s, accusing the grocery store chain of infringing on its trademarks by selling a copycat version of its popular snack...

You generally can’t trademark foods. Sandwich recipes, or certain combinations of sandwich ingredients, are also “quite plainly not a copyrightable work,” an appeals judge ruled in 2015 in a case involving a Puerto Rico man who had attempted to trademark his chicken sandwich.

But you can trademark the specific shape or configuration of a food product. In this case, Smucker’s says, it has trademarked “a round pie-like shape with distinct peripheral undulated crimping” — a design it says Trader Joe’s has copied.

Smucker’s also accused Trader Joe’s of infringing on its trademark image of “a round crustless sandwich with a bite taken out showing filling on the inside,” which the grocery store chain uses on its packaging.

“Smucker does not take issue with others in the marketplace selling prepackaged, frozen, thaw-and-eat crustless sandwiches. But it cannot allow others to use Smucker’s valuable intellectual property to make such sales,” the company said in its filing."

Here's who owns what when it comes to AI, creativity and intellectual property; World Economic Forum, October 10, 2025

 Seemantani Sharma, Co-Founder, Mabill Technologies | Intellectual Property & Innovation Expert, Mabill Technologies, World Economic Forum ; Here's who owns what when it comes to AI, creativity and intellectual property

"Rethinking ownership

The intersection of AI, consciousness and intellectual property requires us to rethink how ownership should evolve. Keeping intellectual property strictly human-centred safeguards accountability, moral agency and the recognition of human creativity. At the same time, acknowledging AI’s expanding role in production may call for new approaches in law. These could take the form of shared ownership models, new categories of liability or entirely new rights frameworks.

For now, the legal balance remains with humans. As long as AI lacks consciousness, it cannot be considered a rights-holder under existing intellectual property theories. Nonetheless, as machine intelligence advances, society faces a pivotal choice. Do we reinforce a human-centred system to protect dignity and creativity or do we adapt the law to reflect emerging realities of collaboration between humans and machines?

This is more than a legal debate. It is a test of how much we value human creativity in an age of intelligent machines. The decisions we take today will shape the future of intellectual property and the meaning of authorship, innovation and human identity itself."

It’s Sam Altman: the man who stole the rights from copyright. If he’s the future, can we go backwards?; The Guardian, October 10, 2025

 Marina Hyde , The Guardian; It’s Sam Altman: the man who stole the rights from copyright. If he’s the future, can we go backwards?

"I’ve seen it said that OpenAI’s motto should be “better to beg forgiveness than ask permission”, but that cosies it preposterously. Its actual motto seems to be “we’ll do what we want and you’ll let us, bitch”. Consider Altman’s recent political journey. “To anyone familiar with the history of Germany in the 1930s,” Sam warned in 2016, “it’s chilling to watch Trump in action.” He seems to have got over this in time to attend Donald Trump’s second inauguration, presumably because – if we have to extend his artless and predictable analogy – he’s now one of the industrialists welcome in the chancellery to carve up the spoils. “Thank you for being such a pro-business, pro-innovation president,” Sam simpered to Trump at a recent White House dinner for tech titans. “It’s a very refreshing change.” Inevitably, the Trump administration has refused to bring forward any AI regulation at all.

Meanwhile, please remember something Sam and his ironicidal maniacs said earlier this year, when it was suggested that the Chinese AI chatbot DeepSeek might have been trained on some of OpenAI’s work. “We are aware of and reviewing indications that DeepSeek may have inappropriately distilled our models, and will share information as we know more,” his firm’s anguished statement ran. “We take aggressive, proactive countermeasures to protect our technology.” Hilariously, it seemed that the last entity on earth with the power to fight AI theft was OpenAI."

Disney Sends Cease And Desist Letter To Character.ai For Copyright Infringement As Studios Move To Protect IP; Deadline, September 30, 2025

Jill Goldsmith, Deadline; Disney Sends Cease And Desist Letter To Character.ai For Copyright Infringement As Studios Move To Protect IP

"Walt Disney sent a cease-and-desist letter to Character.AI, a “personalized superintelligence platform” that the media giant says is ripping off copyrighted characters without authorization.

The AI startup offers users the ability to create customizable, personalized AI companions that can be totally original but in some cases are inspired by existing characters, including, it seems, Disney icons from Spider-Man and Darth Vader to Moana and Elsa.

The letter is the latest legal salvo by Hollywood as studios begin to step up against AI. Disney has also sued AI company Midjourney for allegedly improper use and distribution of AI-generated characters from Disney films. Disney, Warner Bros. and Universal Pictures this month sued Chinese AI firm MiniMax for copyright infringement."

The fanfiction written on a notes app that’s become a bestseller – with a seven-figure film deal; The Guardian, September 29, 2025

The Guardian; The fanfiction written on a notes app that’s become a bestseller – with a seven-figure film deal

"How does a first-time novelist get out of the starting blocks quite like that? The thing is, the author behind the doorstopper dark fantasy novel, Alchemised, is no unknown debut: SenLinYu, 34, started off writing Harry Potter fanfiction that blew up online during the pandemic, racking up more than 20m downloads. Sen’s Draco and Hermione (“Dramione”) fanfic, heavily inspired by The Handmaid’s Tale, has now been rewritten – with third-party IP necessarily removed – and published traditionally as Alchemised. But if you didn’t know about Alchemised’s origins, you would be unlikely to clock them: even squinting, it’s hard to see any trace of Harry Potter in the revamped version, set in a different world and magic system...

Sen began rewriting Manacled around Christmas 2022, and as they were finishing up, they were approached by a literary agency. Stripping away the Harry Potter and overt Handmaid’s Tale references was not “in any way pleasant”, or something they would ever want to do again. “I would rather be shot,” Sen told their Tumblr followers last year. They described the process as taking two 5,000-piece jigsaw puzzles and “having to use both to build a new puzzle that somehow makes sense. Do not recommend. I also had to scrap and build from scratch an entirely new healing and medicine system and it was literally traumatic.”"

OpenAI's new Sora video generator to require copyright holders to opt out, WSJ reports; Reuters, September 29, 2025

Reuters; OpenAI's new Sora video generator to require copyright holders to opt out, WSJ reports

"OpenAI is planning to release a new version of its Sora generator that creates videos featuring copyrighted material, unless rights holders opt out of having their work appear, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday, citing people familiar with the matter.

The artificial intelligence startup began notifying talent agencies and studios over the past week about the opt-out process and the product, which it plans to release in the coming days, the report said.

The new process would mean movie studios and other intellectual property owners would have to explicitly ask OpenAI not to include their copyrighted material in videos Sora creates, according to the report."

Former Penn Carey Law adjunct professor John Squires named director of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office; The Daily Pennsylvanian, September 29, 2025

Matthew Quitoriano , The Daily Pennsylvanian; Former Penn Carey Law adjunct professor John Squires named director of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

"John Squires, a former adjunct professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, was named the next director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Squires will serve as the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and advise 1968 Wharton graduate and President Donald Trump and the Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick on intellectual property policy. In the Sept. 22 announcement, Squires wrote that the opportunity to lead a large and influential office was “both humbling and the honor of a lifetime.”...

Squires served as an adjunct professor for Penn Carey Law's L.L.M. program, where he helped lawyers trained outside the country learn about law in the United States.

The director of the USPTO is appointed by the president with the consent of the Senate...

Squires received a Bachelor of Science in chemistry from Bucknell University and received his J.D. from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. 

Squires previously served as the chief intellectual property counsel at Honeywell and The Goldman Sachs Group, and has held intellectual property roles at Perkins Coie and Chadbourne and Parker. Prior to his secretarial appointment, Squires was the chair of Emerging Companies and Intellectual Property at Dilworth Paxson."

In the fight over AI, copyright is America’s competitive weapon; The Hill, September 29, 2025

In the fight over AI, copyright is America’s competitive weapon, The Hill; In the fight over AI, copyright is America’s competitive weapon

"On Monday, a new $100 million super-PAC network, Leading the Future, was introduced to shape artificial intelligence policy in next year’s elections. The group says it will fight for sensible guardrails on AI while pushing back against efforts it believes could slow AI development.

But if Leading the Future is to live up to its name, it must avoid an easy trap: framing copyright protections as an obstacle to American AI competitiveness."

I Sued Anthropic, and the Unthinkable Happened; The New York Times, September 29, 2025

 Andrea Bartz , The New York Times; I Sued Anthropic, and the Unthinkable Happened

"In August 2024, I became one of three named plaintiffs leading a class-action lawsuit against the A.I. company Anthropic for pirating my books and hundreds of thousands of other books to train its A.I. The fight felt daunting, almost preposterous: me — a queer, female thriller writer — versus a company now worth $183 billion?

Thanks to the relentless work of everyone on my legal team, the unthinkable happened: Anthropic agreed to pay authors and publishers $1.5 billion in the largest copyright settlement in history. A federal judge preliminarily approved the agreement last week.

This settlement sends a clear message to the Big Tech companies splashing generative A.I. over every app and page and program: You are not above the law. And it should signal to consumers everywhere that A.I. isn’t an unstoppable tsunami about to overwhelm us. Now is the time for ordinary Americans to recognize our agency and act to put in place the guardrails we want.

The settlement isn’t perfect. It’s absurd that it took an army of lawyers to demonstrate what any 10-year-old knows is true: Thou shalt not steal. At around $3,000 per work, shared by the author and publisher, the damages are far from life-changing (and, some argue, a slap on the wrist for a company flush with cash). I also disagree with the judge’s ruling that, had Anthropic acquired the books legally, training its chatbot on them would have been “fair use.” I write my novels to engage human minds — not to empower an algorithm to mimic my voice and spit out commodity knockoffs to compete directly against my originals in the marketplace, nor to make that algorithm’s creators unfathomably wealthy and powerful.

But as my fellow plaintiff Kirk Wallace Johnson put it, this is “the beginning of a fight on behalf of humans that don’t believe we have to sacrifice everything on the altar of A.I.” Anthropic will destroy its trove of illegally downloaded books; its competitors should take heed to get out of the business of piracy as well. Dozens of A.I. copyright lawsuits have been filed against OpenAI, Microsoft and other companies, led in part by Sylvia Day, Jonathan Franzen, David Baldacci, John Grisham, Stacy Schiff and George R. R. Martin. (The New York Times has also brought a suit against OpenAI and Microsoft.)

Though a settlement isn’t legal precedent, Bartz v. Anthropic may serve as a test case for other A.I. lawsuits, the first domino to fall in an industry whose “move fast, break things” modus operandi led to large-scale theft. Among the plaintiffs of other cases are voice actors, visual artists, record labels, YouTubers, media companies and stock-photo libraries, diverse stakeholders who’ve watched Big Tech encroach on their territory with little regard for copyright law...

Now the book publishing industry has sent a message to all A.I. companies: Our intellectual property isn’t yours for the taking, and you cannot act with impunity. This settlement is an opening gambit in a critical battle that will be waged for years to come."

Trump administration wants cut of universities’ patent revenue: Lutnick; The Hill, September 10, 2025

LEXI LONAS COCHRAN , The Hill; Trump administration wants cut of universities’ patent revenue: Lutnick

"Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick indicated the Trump administration is looking to take a cut of the revenue generated by university patents developed through federally funded research.

Lutnick in an interview with Axios published Wednesday discussed taking a portion of revenue from the patents, arguing it is unfair for the government to give universities the money with no finanical return...

The original purpose of universities maintaining full ownership of patents was to incentivize the quick development of new technologies. And while most universities seek to commercialize patents, they generally would make more money by writing grants, according to a 2024 study cited by Axios."

Content Creators Want Congress To Revamp Decades-Old Copyright Law; Inc., September 25, 2025

BEN BUTLER , Inc., Content Creators Want Congress To Revamp Decades-Old Copyright Law

"“There’s a growing practice of using the [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] takedown tools built into platforms to restrict and shut down competition [which] are considered traditionally unfair trade practices,” Kayla Morán, a lawyer specializing in trademark and contract law, said last week during a hearing examining content creators and entrepreneurship before the House Committee on Small Business...

As content creation becomes more lucrative, creators can protect their IP by filing as LLCs, Morán said, shifting the liability from the person to the business. LLCs protect business assets from the owner of the business, creating a distinction between the two. Social media accounts can be protected as business assets, thus giving creators more legal protections if a podcast name gets stolen, for example, or in cases of impersonation.

But filing as an LLC as opposed to being a sole proprietorship requires registration fees and higher costs, which vary by state. And filing as an LLC doesn’t prevent the IP from being stolen, it would protect it from being pursued as an asset in a personal lawsuit against the creator. 

Morán and Christina Brennan, who runs a social media management company, said entrepreneurs they work with don’t have the knowledge of contract law and how taxes on social media earnings work.

One way to help bridge the disconnect, Morán suggests, would be for the Small Business Administration to provide guidance, plus access to lawyers that can advise on common challenges that bubble up for content creators, like with protecting IP."

AI as Intellectual Property: A Strategic Framework for the Legal Profession; JD Supra, September 18, 2025

co-authors:James E. Malackowski and Eric T. Carnick , JD Supra; AI as Intellectual Property: A Strategic Framework for the Legal Profession

"The artificial intelligence revolution presents the legal profession with its most significant practice development opportunity since the emergence of the internet. AI spending across hardware, software, and services reached $279.22 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 35.9% through 2030, reaching $1.8 trillion.[i] AI is rapidly enabling unprecedented efficiencies, insights, and capabilities in industry. The innovations underlying these benefits are often the result of protectable intellectual property (IP) assets. The ability to raise capital and achieve higher valuations can often be traced back to such IP. According to data from Carta, startups categorized as AI companies raised approximately one-third of total venture funding in 2024. Looking only at late-stage funding (Series E+), almost half (48%) of total capital raised went to AI companies.[ii]Organizations that implement strategic AI IP management can realize significant financial benefits.

At the same time, AI-driven enhancements have introduced profound industry risks, e.g., disruption of traditional business models; job displacement and labor market reductions; ethical and responsible AI concerns; security, regulatory, and compliance challenges; and potentially, in more extreme scenarios, broad catastrophic economic consequences. Such risks are exacerbated by the tremendous pace of AI development and adoption, in some cases surpassing societal understanding and regulatory frameworks. According to McKinsey, 78% of respondents say their organizations use AI in at least one business function, up

from 72% in early 2024 and 55% a year earlier.[iii]

This duality—AI as both a catalyst and a disruptor—is now a feature of the modern global economy. There is an urgent need for legal frameworks that can protect AI innovation, facilitate the proper commercial development and deployment of AI-related IP, and navigate the risks and challenges posed by this new technology. Legal professionals who embrace AI as IP™ will benefit from this duality. Early indicators suggest significant advantages for legal practitioners who develop specialized AI as IP expertise, while traditional IP practices may face commoditization pressures."

The 18th-century legal case that changed the face of music copyright law; WIPO Magazine, September 18, 2025

 Eyal Brook, Partner, Head of Artificial Intelligence, S. Horowitz & Co , WIPO Magazine;The 18th-century legal case that changed the face of music copyright law

"As we stand at the threshold of the AI revolution in music creation, perhaps the most valuable lesson from this history is not any particular legal doctrine but rather the recognition that our conceptions of musical works and authorship are not fixed but evolving.

Imagine what would have happened had Berne negotiators decided to define the term in 1886. The “musical work” as a legal concept was born from Johann Christian Bach’s determination to assert his creative rights – and it continues to transform with each new technological development and artistic innovation.

The challenge for copyright law in the 21st century is to keep fulfilling copyright’s fundamental purpose: to recognize and reward human creativity in all its forms. This will require not just legal ingenuity but also a willingness to reconsider our most basic assumptions about what music is and how it comes into being.

Bach’s legacy, then, is not just the precedent that he established but the ongoing conversation he initiated – an unfinished symphony of legal thought that continues to evolve with each new technological revolution and artistic movement.

As we face the challenges of AI and whatever technologies may follow, we would do well to remember that the questions we ask today about ownership and creativity echo those first raised in a London courtroom almost 250 years ago by a composer determined to claim what he believed was rightfully his."

Five Copyright Office Resources You May Not Know Exist; Library of Congress Blogs, September 19, 2025

Ashley Tucker , Library of Congress Blogs, Copyright Creativity at Work; Five Copyright Office Resources You May Not Know Exist

"The U.S. Copyright Office provides a wide range of resources to support creators, educators, and other copyright users, but some of the most valuable tools can fly under the radar. Here are five lesser-known Office resources that can help you better understand, register, and manage your creative works."

Trump celebrates TikTok deal as Beijing suggests US app would use China’s algorithm; The Guardian, September 16, 2025

Guardian staff and agencies , The Guardian; Trump celebrates TikTok deal as Beijing suggests US app would use China’s algorithm

[Kip Currier: Wasn't fears about the Chinese government's potential ability to manipulate U.S. TikTok users via the TikTok algorithm one of the chief rationales for the past Congress and Biden administration's banning of TikTok? How does this Trump 2.0 deal materially change any of that?

Another rationale for the ban was concerns about China's potential to access and leverage the personal data and impinge the privacy interests of TikTok users in the U.S. How does this proposed arrangement substantively address these concerns, particularly without comprehensive federal data and privacy legislation to give Americans agency over their own data?

The American people need maximal transparency and oversight of any kind of financial deal like this.]

[Excerpt]

"One of the major questions is the fate of TikTok’s powerful algorithm that helped the app become one of the world’s most popular sources of online entertainment.

At a press conference in Madrid, the deputy head of China’s cyber security regulator said the framework of the deal included “licensing the algorithm and other intellectual property rights”.

Wang Jingtao said ByteDance would “entrust the operation of TikTok’s US user data and content security.”

Some commentators have inferred from these comments that TikTok’s US spinoff will retain the Chinese algorithm."

Class-Wide Relief:The Sleeping Bear of AI Litigation Is Starting to Wake Up; Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, October 2025

Anna B. Naydonov, Mark Davies and Jules Lee, Intellectual Property &Technology Law Journal; Class-Wide Relief:The Sleeping Bear of AI Litigation Is Starting to Wake Up

"Probably no intellectual property (IP) topic in the last several years has gotten more attention than the litigation over the use of the claimed copyrighted content in training artificial intelligence (AI) models.The issue of whether fair use applies to save the day for AI developers is rightfully deemed critical, if not existential, for AI innovation. But whether class relief – and the astronomical damages that may come with it – is available in these cases is a question of no less significance."

Big Questions About AI and the Church Video; August 25, 2025

Big Questions About AI and the Church Video

Kip Currier: This Big Questions About AI and the Church video (1:12:14) was created by the members of my cohort and me (Cohort 7). Our cohort emanated from the groundbreaking August 2024 ecumenical AI & The Church Summit in Seattle that we all attended.

Perhaps raising more questions than providing answers, the video's aim is to encourage reflection and discussion of the many-faceted issues and concerns at the nexus of AI, faith communities, and our broader societies.

Many thanks to our cohort member Rev. Dr. Andy P. Morgan for spearheading, synthesizing, and uploading this video to YouTube.