"The studios’ said they’d engaged specialists in Singapore and China and were informed service could take eight to 24 months."
My Bloomsbury book "Ethics, Information, and Technology" was published on Nov. 13, 2025. Purchases can be made via Amazon and this Bloomsbury webpage: https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/ethics-information-and-technology-9781440856662/
"The studios’ said they’d engaged specialists in Singapore and China and were informed service could take eight to 24 months."
Stuart Heritage, The Guardian; Sean Combs: The Reckoning review – you can see why the musician is fighting to ban this horrific documentary
"If its subject gets his way, the new documentary series Sean Combs: The Reckoning might not be available on Netflix for long. On Monday, lawyers on behalf of Combs sent a cease and desist letter to the streamer, demanding that the series be withdrawn based on the inclusion of footage that they claim violates copyright, and involves discussions of “legal strategy that were not intended for public viewing”."
Ronald Mann , SCOTUSblog; Court to consider billion-dollar judgment for copyright infringement
"The court will hear its big copyright case for the year during the first week of the December session, when on Monday, Dec. 1, it reviews a billion-dollar ruling against Cox Communications based on its failure to eradicate copyright infringement by its customers."
"A federal judge declined to dismiss a copyright-infringement claim in a proposed class action led by Mike Huckabee, accusing Bloomberg LP of using a pirated dataset to train its AI model.
Judge Margaret M. Garnett said she couldn’t evaluate Bloomberg’s defense that its use of authors’ books to train BloombergGPT was fair use under US copyright law without a factual record, denying its motion to dismiss in a Monday opinion filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York."
Nathan Wilk , Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB); White Bird Clinic sues Willamette Valley Crisis Care over misuse of trade secrets, copyright infringement
"Eugene’s White Bird Clinic is suing a rival nonprofit, Willamette Valley Crisis Care, over copyright infringement and the stealing of trade secrets.
WVCC was founded after White Bird shuttered CAHOOTS services in Eugene in April. The new nonprofit hopes to launch a similar mobile crisis intervention program and has multiple former CAHOOTS staff members on board.
White Bird is now alleging that minutes before WVCC co-founder Alese “Dandy” Colehour sent a resignation letter to White Bird earlier this month, they downloaded confidential client information, training manuals and other materials to give to the newer non-profit.
White Bird is also accusing the WVCC of infringing on its CAHOOTS trademark through advertising materials and other public outreach efforts, and of passing off White Bird’s services as its own."
JUSTIN CARTER , Gizmodo; Japanese Companies Tell OpenAI to Stop Infringing On Its IP
"The Content Overseas Distribution Association (CODA), which represents several major Japanese entertainment companies such as TV studio Toei and game developer Square Enix, recently sent a written request calling on OpenAI to end its unauthorized use of their IP to train its recently launched Sora 2 generative AI.
Nearly 20 co-signers have accused the tech company of copyright infringement, alleging a “large portion” of Sora 2 content “closely resembles Japanese content or images [as] a result of using Japanese content as machine learning data.” The letter mentioned OpenAI’s policy of using copyrighted works unless the owner explicitly asks to opt out, but argues under Japanese law, it should instead be an opt-in system, since permission for copyrighted works is generally required beforehand."
Dale Denwalt, The Oklahoman; To protect his copyrights, storm chaser Reed Timmer goes to court often
"A copyright controversy between celebrity storm chaser Reed Timmer and a YouTube streamer highlights a behind-the-scenes legal industry meant to protect original content online.
For fans, it has offered a peek inside the lucrative but complex world of federal copyright law and the legal tools used to make sure original creators get paid when their work is used by someone else. While the dispute was resolved quickly, Timmer often goes to court to protect his work.
A decade ago, it was mostly large, well-established companies and publishers who rooted out cases of copyright infringement, said Oklahoma City attorney Douglas Sorocco. But now there are more independent creators, citizen journalists and small businesses creating their own digital content...
"For the hurricane, I thought it would be A-OK to show very brief clips of what was happening with Milton so I could stay up to date," White said.
Timmer agreed, even if his digital rights management company didn't. In a response video posted the same day as White's, Timmer clarified he is "not suing Charlie" and asked that the copyright claim be removed."
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."
Chantel Tattoli, The New York Times ; Sued for Playing With Toys?
"When Paul Welander, a health care worker in Britain, heard about a lawsuit that the maker of Calico Critters toys recently filed against a social media content creator, he wasn’t totally surprised.
The critters, introduced in 1985, are tiny velvety-bodied animals — rabbits, mice, moles, bears, beavers, badgers, pigs, penguins — dressed in modest clothes and sold in sets as families.
The lawsuit alleges that the creator committed copyright and trademark infringement by making videos that portray the twee toys in scandalous situations: having affairs, driving drunk, taking drugs. Videos not unlike the crassly captioned pictures of the toys, also known as Sylvanians, that Mr. Welander, 51, started sharing on social media back in 2016."
Ed Nawotka , Publishers Weekly; Trump’s Comments Undermine AI Action Plan, Threaten Copyright
"Senate bill proposes 'opt-in' legislation
Trump's comments come on the heels of the introduction, by U.S. senators Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), of the AI Accountability and Personal Data Protection Act this past Monday following a hearing last week on AI companies' copyright infringement. The bipartisan legislation aims to hold AI firms liable for using copyrighted works or personal data without acquiring explicit consent to train AI models. It would empower individuals—including writers, artists, and content creators—to sue companies in federal court if their data or copyrighted works are used without consent. It also supports class action lawsuits and advocates for violators to pay robust penalties.
"AI companies are robbing the American people blind while leaving artists, writers, and other creators with zero recourse," said Hawley. "It’s time for Congress to give the American worker their day in court to protect their personal data and creative works. My bipartisan legislation would finally empower working Americans who now find their livelihoods in the crosshairs of Big Tech’s lawlessness."
"This bill embodies a bipartisan consensus that AI safeguards are urgent—because the technology is moving at accelerating speed, and so are dangers to privacy," added Blumenthal. "Enforceable rules can put consumers back in control of their data, and help bar abuses. Tech companies must be held accountable—and liable legally—when they breach consumer privacy, collecting, monetizing or sharing personal information without express consent. Consumers must be given rights and remedies—and legal tools to make them real—not relying on government enforcement alone."
Brian Stelter, CNN ; Judge dismisses Trump’s copyright lawsuit against Bob Woodward and audiobook publisher
"President Trump’s lawsuit against journalist Bob Woodward and his publishing house Simon & Schuster was dismissed by a federal judge on Friday, the same day that Trump filed a new and unrelated suit against the Wall Street Journal.
US District Judge Paul Gardephe of the Southern District of New York gave Trump’s legal team a month to file another amended complaint. But for now, he dismissed the current iteration and said “it appears unlikely” that Trump “can adequately plead a plausible copyright interest in ‘The Trump Tapes.’”
Morgan Music, Latin Times; Popular Rock Band Demands Trump's DHS Take Down ICE Video Over Copyright Violation: 'And Go F–k Yourselves'
"It's obvious that you don't respect Copyright Law"
Chris Williams , ABOVE THE LAW; Eminem Hits Meta With A Copyright Lawsuit After It Allegedly Misappropriated Hundreds Of His Songs
"Don’t. Mess. With. Eminem. And if the events are as cut and dried as the complaint makes it seem, Meta is getting off easy with the $109M price tag. Meta of all companies should know that the only thing that can get away with brazenly stealing the work of wealthy hard-working artists without facing legal consequences is AI-scrapping software."
Isaiah Poritz, Annelise Levy, Bloomberg Law; Meta Faces Copyright Reckoning in Authors’ Generative AI Case
"The way courts will view the fair use argument for training generative artificial intelligence models with copyrighted materials will be tested Thursday in a San Francisco courtroom, when the first of dozens of such lawsuits reaches summary judgment.
Editorial Board, The Washington Post; How to tell when AI models infringe copyright
"Fair use has been a big part of AI companies’ defense. No matter how well a plaintiff manages to argue that a given AI model infringes copyright, the AI maker can usually point to the doctrine of fair use, which requires consideration of multiple factors, including the purpose of the use (here, criticism, comment and research are favored) and the effect of the use on the marketplace. If, in using a copied work, an AI model adds “something new,” it is probably in the clear."
Virginie Berger , Forbes; The AI Copyright Battle: Why OpenAI And Google Are Pushing For Fair Use
"Furthermore, the ongoing lawsuits against AI firms could serve as a necessary correction to push the industry toward genuinely intelligent machine learning models instead of data-compression-based generators masquerading as intelligence. If legal challenges force AI firms to rethink their reliance on copyrighted content, it could spur innovation toward creating more advanced, ethically sourced AI systems...
A sustainable solution must reconcile technological innovation with creators' economic interests. Policymakers should develop clear federal standards specifying fair use parameters for AI training, considering solutions such as:
These nuanced policies could encourage innovation without sacrificing creators’ rights.
The lobbying by OpenAI and Google reveals broader tensions between rapid technological growth and ethical accountability. While national security concerns warrant careful consideration, they must not justify irresponsible regulation or ethical compromises. A balanced approach, preserving innovation, protecting creators’ rights, and ensuring sustainable and ethical AI development, is critical for future global competitiveness and societal fairness."
Thomas Claburn , The Register; Judge says Meta must defend claim it stripped copyright info from Llama's training fodder
"A judge has found Meta must answer a claim it allegedly removed so-called copyright management information from material used to train its AI models.
The Friday ruling by Judge Vince Chhabria concerned the case Kadrey et al vs Meta Platforms, filed in July 2023 in a San Francisco federal court as a proposed class action by authors Richard Kadrey, Sarah Silverman, and Christopher Golden, who reckon the Instagram titan's use of their work to train its neural networks was illegal.
Their case burbled along until January 2025 when the plaintiffs made the explosive allegation that Meta knew it used copyrighted material for training, and that its AI models would therefore produce results that included copyright management information (CMI) – the fancy term for things like the creator of a copyrighted work, its license and terms of use, its date of creation, and so on, that accompany copyrighted material.
The miffed scribes alleged Meta therefore removed all of this copyright info from the works it used to train its models so users wouldn’t be made aware the results they saw stemmed from copyrighted stuff."
John Blanton Farmer , The Federalist Society; An AI Maker Was Just Found Liable for Copyright Infringement. What Does This Portend for Content Creators and AI Makers?
"In a case decided on February 11, the makers of generative AI (GenAI), such as ChatGPT, lost the first legal battle in the war over whether they commit copyright infringement by using the material of others as training data without permission. The case is called Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH v. Ross Intelligence Inc.
If other courts follow this ruling, the cost of building and selling GenAI services will dramatically increase. Such businesses are already losing money.
The ruling could also empower content creators, such as writers, to deny the use of their material to train GenAIs or to demand license fees. Some creators might be unwilling to license use of their material for training AIs due to fear that GenAI will destroy demand for their work."
Joseph A. Meckes, Joseph Grasser of Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP - Global IP and Technology Law Blog, The National Law Review; Court: Training AI Model Based on Copyrighted Data Is Not Fair Use as a Matter of Law
"In what may turn out to be an influential decision, Judge Stephanos Bibas ruled as a matter of law in Thompson Reuters v. Ross Intelligence that creating short summaries of law to train Ross Intelligence’s artificial intelligence legal research application not only infringes Thompson Reuters’ copyrights as a matter of law but that the copying is not fair use. Judge Bibas had previously ruled that infringement and fair use were issues for the jury but changed his mind: “A smart man knows when he is right; a wise man knows when he is wrong.”
At issue in the case was whether Ross Intelligence directly infringed Thompson Reuters’ copyrights in its case law headnotes that are organized by Westlaw’s proprietary Key Number system. Thompson Reuters contended that Ross Intelligence’s contractor copied those headnotes to create “Bulk Memos.” Ross Intelligence used the Bulk Memos to train its competitive AI-powered legal research tool. Judge Bibas ruled that (i) the West headnotes were sufficiently original and creative to be copyrightable, and (ii) some of the Bulk Memos used by Ross were so similar that they infringed as a matter of law...
In other words, even if a work is selected entirely from the public domain, the simple act of selection is enough to give rise to copyright protection."