The copyright war between the AI industry and creatives; Financial Times, June 23, 2025

 MARTIN WOLF, Financial Times ; The copyright war between the AI industry and creatives

"One is that the government itself estimates that “creative industries generated £126bn in gross value added to the economy [5 per cent of GDP] and employed 2.4 million people in 2022”. It is at the very least an open question whether the value added of the AI industry will ever be of a comparable scale in this country. Another is that the creative industries represent much of the best of what the UK and indeed humanity does. The idea of handing over its output for free is abhorrent...

Interestingly, for much of the 19th century, the US did not recognise international copyright at all in its domestic law. Anthony Trollope himself complained fiercely about the theft of the copyright over his books."

Getty Images Faces Off Against Stability in Court as First Major AI Copyright Trial Begins; PetaPixel, June 10, 2025

Matt Growcoot , PetaPixel; Getty Images Faces Off Against Stability in Court as First Major AI Copyright Trial Begins

"The Guardian notes that the trial will focus on specific photos taken by famous photographers. Getty plans to bring up photos of the Chicago Cubs taken by sports photographer Gregory Shamus and photos of film director Christopher Nolan taken by Andreas Rentz. 

All-in-all, 78,000 pages of evidence have been disclosed for the case and AI experts are being called in to give testimonies. Getty is also suing Stability AI in the United States in a parallel case. The trial in London is expected to run for three weeks and will be followed by a written decision from the judge at a later date."

Lawyers face sanctions for citing fake cases with AI, warns UK judge; Reuters, June 6, 2025

 Sam Tobin, Reuters; Lawyers face sanctions for citing fake cases with AI, warns UK judge

"Lawyers who use artificial intelligence to cite non-existent cases can be held in contempt of court or even face criminal charges, London's High Court warned on Friday, in the latest example of generative AI leading lawyers astray.

A senior judge lambasted lawyers in two cases who apparently used AI tools when preparing written arguments, which referred to fake case law, and called on regulators and industry leaders to ensure lawyers know their ethical obligations.

"There are serious implications for the administration of justice and public confidence in the justice system if artificial intelligence is misused," Judge Victoria Sharp said in a written ruling...

She added that "in the most egregious cases, deliberately placing false material before the court with the intention of interfering with the administration of justice amounts to the common law criminal offence of perverting the course of justice"."

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."

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."

As US and UK refuse to sign the Paris AI Action Summit statement, other countries commit to developing ‘open, inclusive, ethical’ AI;TechCrunch, February 11, 2025

Romain Dillet, TechCrunch ; As US and UK refuse to sign the Paris AI Action Summit statement, other countries commit to developing ‘open, inclusive, ethical’ AI

"The Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris was supposed to culminate with a joint declaration on artificial intelligence signed by dozens of world leaders. While the statement isn’t as ambitious as the Bletchley and Seoul declarations, both the U.S. and the U.K. have refused to sign it.

It proves once again that it is difficult to reach a consensus around artificial intelligence — and other topics — in the current (fraught) geopolitical context.

“We feel very strongly that AI must remain free from ideological bias and that American AI will not be co-opted into a tool for authoritarian censorship,” U.S. vice president, JD Vance, said in a speech during the summit’s closing ceremony.

“The United States of America is the leader in AI, and our administration plans to keep it that way,” he added.

In all, 61 countries — including China, India, Japan, Australia, and Canada — have signed the declaration that states a focus on “ensuring AI is open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure and trustworthy.” It also calls for greater collaboration when it comes to AI governance, fostering a “global dialogue.”

Early reactions have expressed disappointment over a lack of ambition."

AI's assault on our intellectual property must be stopped; Financial Times, December 21, 2024

Kate Mosse, Financial Times; AI's assault on our intellectual property must be stopped

"Imagine my dismay, therefore, to discover that those 15 years of dreaming, researching, planning, writing, rewriting, editing, visiting libraries and archives, translating Occitan texts, hunting down original 13th-century documents, becoming an expert in Catharsis, apparently counts for nothing. Labyrinth is just one of several of my novels that have been scraped by Meta's large language model. This has been done without my consent, without remuneration, without even notification. This is theft...

AI companies present creators as being against change. We are  not. Every artist I know is already engaging with AI in one way or another. But a distinction needs to be made between AI that can be used in brilliant ways -- for example, medical diagnosis -- and the foundations of AI models, where companies are essentially stealing creatives' work for their own profit. We should not forget that the AI companies rely on creators to build their models. Without strong copyright law that ensures creators can earn a living, AI companies will lack the high-quality material that is essential for their future growth."

Paul McCartney warns AI ‘could take over’ as UK debates copyright laws; The Guardian, December 10, 2024

 Robert Booth UK technology editor, The Guardian; Paul McCartney warns AI ‘could take over’ as UK debates copyright laws

"Paul McCartney has backed calls for laws to stop mass copyright theft by companies building generative artificial intelligence, warning AI “could just take over”.

The former Beatle said it would be “a very sad thing indeed” if young composers and writers could not protect their intellectual property from the rise of algorithmic models, which so far have learned by digesting mountains of copyrighted material.

He spoke out amid growing concern that the rise of AI is threatening income streams for music, news and book publishers. Next week the UK parliament will debate amendments to the data bill that could allow creators to decide whether or not their copyrighted work can be used to train generative AI models."

Internet Archive’s digital library has been found in breach of copyright. The decision has some important implications; The Conversation, August 22, 2023

Agata Mrva-Montoya, Lecturer, Department of Media and Communications, University of Sydney, The Conversation; Internet Archive’s digital library has been found in breach of copyright. The decision has some important implications

"The outcome of the court case may affect the fate of controlled digital lending more broadly."

Poet and translator to sue British Museum for copyright and moral rights infringement; The Art Newspaper, July 7, 2023

 Anny Shaw, The Art Newspaper; Poet and translator to sue British Museum for copyright and moral rights infringement

"Sharples notes that the legal case will not only focus on copyright, but also Wang’s moral rights, in particular the right to attribution—or the right to be named or identified as the author."

Copyright Infringement Suit Involving Nirvana and Dante’s ‘Inferno’ Illustration Heads to the UK; ArtNews, July 5, 2023

DANIEL CASSADY , ArtNews; Copyright Infringement Suit Involving Nirvana and Dante’s ‘Inferno’ Illustration Heads to the UK

"According to Bundy, not only are Nirvana and Live Nation using her grandfather’s work without permission but they are also claiming ownership of the work and adding copyright notices to the image.

Nirvana and Live Nation’s legal representative told Courthouse News that in the United States the image has been in the public domain since at least 1949. “Resolving the claims will require determinations of complex English and German copyright law issues based on decades-old documents and witnesses in England,” the attorneys added."

ChatGPT: what the law says about who owns the copyright of AI-generated content; The Conversation, April 17, 2023

Sercan Ozcan, University of Portsmouth; Joe Sekhon, Senior Lecturer in Intellectual Property Law, University of Portsmouth; Oleksandra Ozcan, Lecturer, University of Portsmouth, The Conversation; , ChatGPT: what the law says about who owns the copyright of AI-generated content

"The AI chatbot ChatGPT produces content that can appear to have been created by a human. There are many proposed uses for the technology, but its impressive capabilities raise important questions about ownership of the content.

UK legislation has a definition for computer-generated works. Under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 they are “generated by computer in circumstances such that there is no human author of the work”. The law suggests content generated by an artificial intelligence (AI) can be protected by copyright. However, the original sources of answers generated by AI chatbots can be difficult to trace – and they might include copyrighted works.

The first question is whether ChatGPT should be allowed to use original content generated by third parties to generate its responses. The second is whether only humans can be credited as the authors of AI-generated content, or whether the AI itself can be regarded as an author – particularly when that output is creative."

Cornish pub will not change name despite letter from Vogue owner; The Guardian, May 13, 2022

Geneva Abdul, The Guardian; Cornish pub will not change name despite letter from Vogue owner

"A new letter was sent to the owners on Friday afternoon in which a Condé Nast lawyer admitted it was a mix-up.

He said: “You are quite correct to note that further research by our team would have identified that we did not need to send such a letter on this occasion.”"

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex to receive confidential sum from UK newspaper for copyright infringement; CNN, January 5, 2022

Niamh Kennedy, CNN; Meghan, Duchess of Sussex to receive confidential sum from UK newspaper for copyright infringement

"The court found ANL infringed Meghan's copyright by publishing extracts of a handwritten letter she sent to her father in The Mail on Sunday newspaper and Mail Online website during hearings in January and May last year, the court order says.

The group is also set to pay the duchess £1 in nominal damages for misuse of private information, according to the court order.

On December 2, the Court of Appeal upheld a ruling that ANL had misused Meghan's private information through their publication of the letter, saying the Duchess had "had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the letter.""

Russia Is Trying to Steal Virus Vaccine Data, Western Nations Say; The New York Times, July 16, 2020

Julian E. Barnes, The New York Times; Russia Is Trying to Steal Virus Vaccine Data, Western Nations Say

"Chinese government hackers have long focused on stealing intellectual property and technology. Russia has aimed much of its recent cyberespionage, like election interference, at weakening geopolitical rivals and strengthening its hand.

“China is more well known for theft through hacking than Russia, which is of course better now for using hacks for disruption and chaos,” said Laura Rosenberger, a former Obama administration official who now leads the Alliance for Securing Democracy. “But there’s no question that whoever gets to a vaccine first thinks they will have geopolitical advantage, and that’s something I’d expect Russia to want.”"

Proposals for Copyright Law and Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic; infojustice, June 9, 2020

Emily Hudson and Paul Wragg, infojustice; Proposals for Copyright Law and Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic

"Abstract: This article asks whether the catastrophic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic justifies new limitations or interventions in copyright law so that UK educational institutions can continue to serve the needs of their students. It describes the existing copyright landscape and suggests ways in which institutions can rely on exceptions in the CDPA, including fair dealing and the exemption for lending by educational establishments. It then considers the viability of other solutions. It argues that issues caused by the pandemic would not enliven a public interest defence to copyright infringement (to the extent this still exists in UK law) but may be relevant to remedies. It also argues that compulsory licensing, while permissible under international copyright law, would not be a desirable intervention, but that legislative expansion to the existing exceptions, in order to encourage voluntary collective licensing, has a number of attractions. It concludes by observing that the pandemic highlights issues with the prevailing model for academic publishing, and asks whether COVID may encourage universities to embrace in-house and open access publishing more swiftly and for an even greater body of material."

Article 13: UK will not implement EU copyright law; BBC News, January 24, 2020

BBC News; Article 13: UK will not implement EU copyright law

"Universities and Science Minister Chris Skidmore has said that the UK will not implement the EU Copyright Directive after the country leaves the EU.

Several companies have criticised the law, which would hold them accountable for not removing copyrighted content uploaded by users, if it is passed.

EU member states have until 7 June 2021 to implement the new reforms, but the UK will have left the EU by then.

The UK was among 19 nations that initially supported the law.

That was in its final European Council vote in April 2019."

Brexit Update - January 2020; Dehns via Mondaq, January 15, 2020

Clare Mann, Dehns via Mondaq; Brexit Update - January 2020

"On 9 January 2020, MPs voted in favour of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill, the legislation which will implement the Government's proposed Withdrawal Agreement. The Bill has now passed to the House of Lords for further review and it is expected that the Withdrawal Agreement will be ratified by the European Parliament later this month.

The UK is due to leave the EU on 31 January 2020.  Assuming the Withdrawal Agreement is ratified, an 11-month transition period until 31 December 2020 will commence immediately upon the UK's exit, during which the status quo will remain. EU trade mark registrations will continue to have legal effect in the UK during the transition period and UK trade mark attorneys will retain their rights of representation before the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

At the end of the transition period, EU trade marks which are fully registered will be automatically cloned in the UK by the creation of comparable UK national rights which will retain the EU filing dates (and any relevant priority/seniority dates). These national rights will be created by the UK Intellectual Property Office free-of-charge.

EU trade marks which are the subject of pending applications when the transition period ends will not be automatically cloned in the UK.  Instead, their owners will have a period of nine months in which to re-file in the UK while retaining the EU filing date and, if appropriate, priority/seniority date(s).  Regular official filing fees will apply."

Intellectual property and Brexit: Guidance on trade marks, designs, patents right law, and exhaustion of IP rights after Brexit.; UK Intellectual Property Office, October 10, 2019

UK Intellectual Property Office;

Intellectual property and Brexit

Guidance on trade marks, designs, patents right law, and exhaustion of IP rights after Brexit.