Americans are ‘deer in the headlights’ in face of Trump assault on free speech, Maria Ressa tells Jon Stewart; The Guardian, September 19, 2025

 Jonathan Yerushalmy , The Guardian; Americans are ‘deer in the headlights’ in face of Trump assault on free speech, Maria Ressa tells Jon Stewart

[Kip Currier: How smart for Jon Stewart to talk with 2021 Nobel Peace Prize Winner Maria Ressa at this break-the-glass and Call-911 moment, when American free speech and independent non-state-run media are under attack by the Trump 2.0 administration. Ressa was awarded the 2021 Peace Prize with Russian journalist Dmitry Muratov for free speech advocacy in their respective Philippines and Russia.

Ressa's phone number should be on speed dial for any American reporter, politician, and civil watchdog group committed to championing freedom of the press and free speech by learning from her first-hand experiences with authoritarianism and dictators, like the Philippines' Rodrigo Duterte. Her 2022 book How To Stand Up To A Dictator serves as a battle-seasoned anti-totalitarianism fighter's counter-playbook to the now-predictable authoritarian playbooks of autocrats like Hungary's Viktor Orban and Russia's Vladimir Putin.

The notes feature on my phone is full of practical insights from Ressa, too, on the dangers of unchecked social media and disinformation, which are more recent tools for opponents of democracy and informed citizenries:

"By design social media divides and radicalizes." Fresh Air, 12/1/22

"Disinformation is like cocaine."

"Silence is consent."

"Cynicism and hopelessness are the tools of a tyrant."

"Inspiration spreads as fast as anger". Ressa gave the example of Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy choosing not to flee when Russia invaded Ukraine on 2/24/22.

"What are you willing to sacrifice for the truth?"]

[Excerpt]

"The Nobel prize winner Maria Ressa has said Americans are like “deer in the headlights” amid the collapse of US institutions and free speech under the Trump administration, particularly after Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension.

Speaking to Jon Stewart on the satirical news programme The Daily Show, the journalist and author of How to Stand Up to a Dictator said the speed at which Donald Trump had “collapsed” US institutions happened much faster than she anticipated.

She drew comparisons between the Trump administration and the government of the former president Rodrigo Duterte in her home country of the Philippines, saying: “If you don’t move and protect the rights you have, you lose them. And it’s so much harder to reclaim them.”...

Ressa, who won the 2021 Nobel peace prize for her fight for freedom of expression in the Philippines, told Stewart people the world over were electing “illiberal leaders democratically because of insidious manipulation … [which] starts with the manipulation and corruption of our public information ecosystem”.

She said “there is a ‘dictator’s playbook’”, comparing the Trump administration’s attacks on alleged Venezuelan drug boats to former president Rodrigo Duterte’s brutal crackdown on drug-dealing in the Philippines.

When asked by Stewart what happens next, Ressa pointed to her own work as a journalist in the Philippines, saying: “We just kept doing our jobs, we kept putting one foot in front of the other.”"

Trump Seeks Full Court Rehearing on Copyright Chief Perlmutter; Bloomberg Law, September 18, 2025

Kyle Jahner

, Bloomberg Law; Trump Seeks Full Court Rehearing on Copyright Chief Perlmutter

"The Trump Administration asked the full D.C. Circuit to rehear a successful bid by Shira Perlmutter to be temporarily restored as the head of the US Copyright Office."

AI could never replace my authors. But, without regulation, it will ruin publishing as we know it; The Guardian, September 18, 2025

Jonny Geller, The Guardian ; AI could never replace my authors. But, without regulation, it will ruin publishing as we know it

[Kip Currier: This is a thought-provoking piece by literary agent Jonny Geller. He suggests an "artists’ rights charter for AI that protects two basic principles: permission and attribution". His charter idea conveys some aspects of the copyright area called "moral rights".

Moral rights provide copyright creators with a right of paternity (i.e. attribution) and a right of integrity. The latter can enable creators to exercise some levels of control over how their copyrighted works can be adapted. The moral right of integrity, for example, was an argument in cases involving whether black and white films (legally) could be or (ethically) should be colorized. (See Colors in Conflicts: Moral Rights and the Foreign Exploitation of Colorized U.S. Motion Pictures) Moral rights are not widespread in U.S. copyright law because of tensions between the moral right of integrity and the right of free expression/free speech under the U.S. Constitution (whose September 17, 1787 birthday was yesterday). The Visual Artists Rights Act (1990) is a narrow example of moral rights under U.S. copyright law.

To Geller's proposed Artists' Rights Charter for AI I'd suggest adding the word and concept of "Responsibilities". Compelling arguments can be made for providing authors with some rights regarding use of their copyrighted works as AI training data. And, commensurately, persuasive arguments can be made that authors have certain responsibilities if they use AI at any stage of their creative processes. Authors can and ethically should be transparent about how they have used AI, if applicable, in the creation stages of their writing.

Of course, how to operationalize that as an ethical standard is another matter entirely. But just because it may be challenging to initially develop some ethical language as guidance for authors and strive to instill it as a broad standard doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted or done.]

[Excerpt]

"The single biggest threat to the livelihood of authors and, by extension, to our culture, is not short attention spans. It is AI...

As a literary agent and CEO of one of the largest agencies in Europe, I think this is something everyone should care about – not because we fear progress, but because we want to protect it. If you take away the one thing that makes us truly human – our ability to think like humans, create stories and imagine new worlds – we will live in a diminished world.

AI that doesn’t replace the artist, or that will work with them transparently, is not all bad. An actor who is needed for reshoots on a movie may authorise use of the footage they have to complete a picture. This will save on costs, the environmental impact and time. A writer may wish to speed up their research and enhance their work by training their own models to ask the questions that a researcher would. The translation models available may enhance the range of offering of foreign books, adding to our culture.

All of this is worth discussing. But it has to be a discussion and be transparent to the end user. Up to now, work has simply been stolen and there are insufficient guardrails on the distributors, studios, publishers. As a literary agent, I have a more prosaic reason to get involved – I don’t think it is fair for someone’s work to be taken without their permission to create an inferior competitor.

What can we do? We could start with some basic principles for all to sign up to. An artists’ rights charter for AI that protects two basic principles: permission and attribution."

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."

AI will make the rich unfathomably richer. Is this really what we want?; The Guardian, September 16, 2025

 Dustin Guastella , The Guardian; AI will make the rich unfathomably richer. Is this really what we want?

"Socially, the great gains of the knowledge economy have also failed to live up to their promises. With instantaneous global connectivity, we were promised cultural excellence and social effervescence. Instead, we’ve been delivered an endless scroll of slop. Smartphone addictions have made us more vicious, bitter and boring. Social media has made us narcissistic. Our attention spans have been zapped by the constant, pathological need to check our notifications. In the built environment, the omnipresence of touchscreen kiosks has removed even the slightest possibility of social interaction. Instead of having conversations with strangers, we now only interact with screens. All of this has made us more lonely and less happy. As a cure, we’re now offered AI companions, which have the unfortunate side effect of occasionally inducing psychotic breaks. Do we really need any more of this?"

Ethical AI Design and Implementation: A Systematic Literature Review; AIS eLibrary, August 2025

Katia Guerra, AIS eLibrary; Ethical AI Design and Implementation: A Systematic Literature Review

"Abstract

This study analyzes to what extent information systems (IS) research has investigated artificial intelligence (AI) applications and the ethical concerns that these applications pose in light of the EU AI Act and the recommendations and guidelines provided by other institutions, including the White House, UNESCO, OECD, and Université de Montréal. A systematic literature review methodology and a semantic text similarity analysis will be employed to conduct this investigation. The results of such investigation will lead to contributions to IS researchers by synthesizing previous IS studies on ethical AI design and implementation and proposing an agenda and future directions for IS research to make it more oriented toward the compliance of AI systems with current ethical provisions and considerations. This study will also help practitioners to be more aware of AI ethics and foster technical and managerial solutions that could be developed in compliance with current institutional ethical demands."

Google's top AI scientist says ‘learning how to learn’ will be next generation's most needed skill; Associated Press via Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 12, 2025

 DEREK GATOPOULOS, Associated Press via Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; Google's top AI scientist says ‘learning how to learn’ will be next generation's most needed skill

"A top Google scientist and 2024 Nobel laureate said Friday that the most important skill for the next generation will be “learning how to learn” to keep pace with change as artificial intelligence transforms education and the workplace.

Speaking at an ancient Roman theater at the foot of the Acropolis in Athens, Demis Hassabis, CEO of Google’s DeepMind, said rapid technological change demands a new approach to learning and skill development...

Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis joined Mr. Hassabis at the Athens event after discussing ways to expand AI use in government services. Mr. Mitsotakis warned that the continued growth of huge tech companies could create great global financial inequality.

“Unless people actually see benefits, personal benefits, to this (AI) revolution, they will tend to become very skeptical," he said. "And if they see ... obscene wealth being created within very few companies, this is a recipe for significant social unrest.”

Internet Archive ends legal battle with record labels over historic recordings; San Francisco Chronicle, September 15, 2025

 Aidin Vaziri, San Francisco Chronicle; Internet Archive ends legal battle with record labels over historic recordings

"The case, UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Internet Archive, targeted the Internet Archive’s Great 78 Project, an initiative to digitize more than 400,000 fragile shellac records from the early 20th century. The collection includes music by artists such as Frank Sinatra, Ella Fitzgerald and Billie Holiday, and has been made available online for free public access.

Record labels including Universal, Sony Music Entertainment and Capitol Records had sought $621 million in damages, arguing the Internet Archive’s streaming of these recordings constituted copyright infringement.

The lawsuit drew widespread attention from musicians and preservationists."

Protecting Your Intellectual Property: What You Need to Know About Copyright; Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers Association (SFWA), September 11, 2025

Victoria Strauss of Writer Beware®, Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers Association (SFWA) ; Protecting Your Intellectual Property: What You Need to Know About Copyright

"Copyright is a complex subject about which there are many misconceptions.

I was reminded of that this week, thanks to an email from an author who discovered that several of their books were included in one of the databases of pirated works used by the AI company Anthropic for AI training. The author wanted to know whether they were eligible to be part of the gigantic $1.5 billion settlement Anthropic has agreed to pay to compensate writers for its misuse of their intellectual property. (You can read more about the lawsuit, and the settlement, here.)

One of the criteria for eligibility, set by the court, is that copyrights to the pirated works must have been properly registered with the US Copyright Office before Anthropic downloaded the databases. And indeed, the author’s books were all registered in a timely manner…but not with the Copyright Office. Instead, the author used a website called Copyrighted.com, which offers a kind of faux registration using timestamps and its own certificates.

I had to tell the author that no, they weren’t eligible for compensation for their pirated books. In the United States, there’s no equivalent or substitute for the US Copyright Office’s official registration process. The author couldn’t even use the materials they’d gotten from Coprighted.com as prima facie evidence of copyright ownership. Again, only official registration provides that.

In this article, I’m going to cover the basics of copyright, offer some warnings, and dispel some myths. I know that much of what follows will be familiar to a lot of readers—but as the example above shows, knowledge gaps not only exist, but can be damaging…and as always in the writing biz, knowledge is your greatest ally and your best defense. I hope even the most copyright-savvy readers will find something useful here."

Preparing faith leaders to prepare others to use artificial intelligence in a faithful way; Presbyterian News Service, September 4, 2025

 Mike Ferguson , Presbyterian News Service; Preparing faith leaders to prepare others to use artificial intelligence in a faithful way

"It turns out an engineer whose career included stops at Boeing and Amazon — and who happens to be a person of deep faith — has plenty to say about how faith leaders can use artificial intelligence in places of worship.

Jovonia Taylor-Hayes took to the lectern Wednesday during Faithful Futures: Guiding AI with Wisdom and Witness, which is being offered online and at Westminster Presbyterian Church in Minneapolis. The PC(USA)’s Office of Innovation is among the organizers and sponsors, which also includes The Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

Think of all the varied ways everyday people use AI, Taylor-Hayes said, including as an aid to streamline grocery shopping and resume building; by medical teams for note-taking; for virtual meetings and closed-captioning, which is getting better, she said; and in customer service.

“The question is, what does it look like when we stop and think about what AI means to me personally? Where does your head and heart go?” she asked. One place where hers goes to is scripture, including Ephesians 2:10 and Psalm 139:14. “God has prepared us,” she said, “to do what we need to do.”

During the first of two breakout sessions, she asked small groups both in person and online to discuss questions including where AI shows up in their daily work and life and why they use AI as a tool."

World Meeting on Human Fraternity: Disarming words to disarm the world; Vatican News, September 13, 2025

Roberto Paglialonga, Vatican News ; World Meeting on Human Fraternity: Disarming words to disarm the world

[Kip Currier: There is great wisdom and guidance in these words from Pope Leo and Fr. Enzo Fortunato (highlighted from this Vatican News article for emphasis):

“Pope Leo XIV’s words echo: ‘Before being believers, we are called to be human.’” Therefore, Fr. Fortunato concluded, we must “safeguard truth, freedom, and dignity as common goods of humanity. That is the soul of our work—not the defense of corporations or interests.”"

What is in the best interests of corporations and shareholders should not -- must not -- ever be this planet's central organizing principle.

To the contrary, that which is at the very center of our humanity -- truth, freedom, the well-being and dignity of each and every person, and prioritization of the best interests of all members of humanity -- MUST be our North Star and guiding light.]

[Excerpt]

"Representatives from the world of communication and information—directors and CEOs of international media networks— gathered in Rome for the “News G20” roundtable, coordinated by Father Enzo Fortunato, director of the magazine Piazza San Pietro. The event took place on Friday 12 September in the Sala della Protomoteca on Rome's Capitoline Hill. The participants addressed a multitude of themes, including transparency and freedom of information in times of war and conflict: the truth of facts as an essential element to “disarm words and disarm the world,” as Pope Leo XIV has said, so that storytelling and narrative may once again serve peace, dialogue, and fraternity. They also discussed the responsibility of those who work in media to promote the value of competence, in-depth reporting, and credibility in an age dominated by unchecked social media, algorithms, clickbait slogans, and rampant expressions of hatred and violence from online haters.

Three pillars of our time: truth, freedom, Dignity

In opening the workshop, Father Fortunato outlined three “pillars” that can no longer be taken for granted in our time: truth, freedom, and dignity. Truth, he said, is “too often manipulated and exploited,” and freedom is “wounded,” as in many countries around the world “journalists are silenced, persecuted, or killed.” Yet “freedom of the press should be a guarantee for citizens and a safeguard for democracy.” Today, Fr. Fortunato continued, “we have many ‘dignitaries’ but little dignity”: people are targeted by “hate and defamation campaigns, often deliberately orchestrated behind a computer screen. Words can wound more than weapons—and not infrequently, those wounds lead to extreme acts.” Precisely in a historical period marked by division and conflict, humanity—despite its diverse peoples, cultures, and opinions—is called to rediscover what unites it. “Pope Leo XIV’s words echo: ‘Before being believers, we are called to be human.’” Therefore, Fr. Fortunato concluded, we must “safeguard truth, freedom, and dignity as common goods of humanity. That is the soul of our work—not the defense of corporations or interests.”"

A.I.’s Prophet of Doom Wants to Shut It All Down; The New York Times, September 12, 2025

 Kevin Roose , The New York Times; A.I.’s Prophet of Doom Wants to Shut It All Down

"The first time I met Eliezer Yudkowsky, he said there was a 99.5 percent chance that A.I. was going to kill me.

I didn’t take it personally. Mr. Yudkowsky, 46, is the founder of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, a Berkeley-based nonprofit that studies risks from advanced artificial intelligence.

For the last two decades, he has been Silicon Valley’s version of a doomsday preacher — telling anyone who will listen that building powerful A.I. systems is a terrible idea, one that will end in disaster.

That is also the message of Mr. Yudkowsky’s new book, “If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies.” The book, co-written with MIRI’s president, Nate Soares, is a distilled, mass-market version of the case they have been making to A.I. insiders for years.

Their goal is to stop the development of A.I. — and the stakes, they say, are existential...

And what about the good things that A.I. can do? Wouldn’t shutting down A.I. development also mean delaying cures for diseases, A.I. tutors for students and other benefits?

“We totally acknowledge the good effects,” he replied. “Yep, these things could be great tutors. Yep, these things sure could be useful in drug discovery. Is that worth exterminating all life on Earth? No.”"

Is ‘The Pitt’ Really an ‘ER’ Spinoff? Michael Crichton’s Estate Says It Is.; The New York Times, September 12, 2025

Nicholas Kulish, The New York Times ; Is ‘The Pitt’ Really an ‘ER’ Spinoff? Michael Crichton’s Estate Says It Is.

The estate of the best-selling author, which has intellectual property rights to “ER,” and the creators of the new hit TV show are waging a legal battle over whether it’s a stealth reboot.

"On Nov. 4, the defendants asked the court to dismiss the complaint, citing their constitutional free speech rights and arguing that “The Pitt” is not a derivative work of “ER.” They emphasized that the new series is about the post-Covid world, reminding the judge that it deals with events that arose after Mr. Crichton’s death...

Rewatching “ER” through the lens of the lawsuit — as a jury might be asked to — can be a strange experience. Is the struggle over whether to put a dying elderly patient onto a ventilator a distinct plot point (this would support Team Crichton) or an everyday tragedy in a large urban hospital (Team Pitt)?

“‘The Pitt’ has no connection to ‘ER’ — it does not use ‘ER’’s intellectual property, characters, plot, setting or narrative pacing,” the defendants said. “While both series are medical dramas set in a hospital, this concept is hardly unique.” They name-checked “Grey’s Anatomy,” “Chicago Med,” “House” and “The Good Doctor.”...

The case “could serve as a model for how to figure out how much things are worth in the streaming space,” said Jennifer Porst, a professor of media industry studies at Emory University in Atlanta."

Perplexity's definition of copyright gets it sued by the dictionary; Engadget, September 11, 2025

 Anna Washenko, Engadget; Perplexity's definition of copyright gets it sued by the dictionary

"Merriam-Webster and its parent company Encyclopedia Britannica are the latest to take on AI in court. The plaintiffs have sued Perplexity, claiming that AI company's "answer engine" product unlawfully copies their copyrighted materials. They are also alleging copyright infringement for instances where Perplexity's AI creates false or inaccurate hallucinations that it then wrongly attributes to Britannica or Merriam-Webster. The complaint, filed in New York federal court, is seeking unspecified monetary damages and an order that blocks Perplexity from misusing their content."

GPT-5’s Ethics Guidelines for Using It in Philosophical Research; Daily Nous, September 10, 2025

   

Justin Weinberg

, Daily Nous; GPT-5’s Ethics Guidelines for Using It in Philosophical Research

"In a post last month, we discussed the question, “How much use of AI in our research is acceptable?...

What do you think of ChatGPT-5’s three positions regarding ethical AI use in research? Are they missing anything? Are they too demanding? Are they any good?"

Books by Bots: Librarians grapple with AI-generated material in collections; American Libraries, September 2, 2025

 Reema Saleh  , American Libraries; Books by Bots: Librarians grapple with AI-generated material in collections

"How to Spot AI-Generated Books

Once an AI-generated book has made it to your library, it will likely give itself away with telltale signs such as jumbled, repetitive, or contradicting sentences; glaring grammatical errors or false statements; or digital art that looks too smooth around the corners.

Of course, if you can get a digital sneak-peek inside a book before ordering, all the better. But if not, how can you head off AI content so it never arrives on your desk? The following tips can help.

• Look into who the author is and how “real” they seem, says Robin Bradford, a collection development librarian at a public library in Washington. An author with no digital footprint is a red flag, especially if they are credited with a slew of titles each year. Also a red flag: a book with no author listed at all.
• Exercise caution regarding self-published books, small presses, or platforms such as Amazon, which filters out less AI-generated content than other vendors do.
• Think about whether the book is capitalizing on the chance that a reader will confuse it with another, more popular book, says Jane Stimpson, a library instruction and educational technology consultant for the Massachusetts Library System. Does it have a cover similar to that of an existing bestseller? Just as animated Disney movies get imitated by low-budget knockoffs, popular titles get imitated by AI-generated books.
• Check if there is mention of AI use in the Library of Congress record associated with the book, says Sarah Manning, a collection development librarian at Boise (Idaho) Public Library (BPL). If the book has been registered with the US Copyright Office, its record may mention AI."

An Essay Contest Winner Used A.I. Should She Return the $1,000 Award?; The Ethicist, The New York Times; September 10, 2025

 Kwame Anthony Appiah, The Ethicist, The New York Times ; An Essay Contest Winner Used A.I. Should She Return the $1,000 Award?

[Kip Currier: This is a thought-provoking and timely ethical dilemma, especially with the proliferation of AI into more and more aspects of our personal and professional lives.

The question posed to The Ethicist in this edition of his column is about students submitting essays for a contest. The questioner wonders if the students have used AI to write their essays. The contest winners are awarded a monetary scholarship. The questioner wonders if they should confront the winners. The beauty of this question is that we don't know for sure whether AI was or was not used. It's totally speculative. What would you do?

Does your thinking change as to whether using AI to write something is ethical or unethical if:

• AI is used by a university professor to prepare a lecture
• AI is used by a university professor to create an essay exam
• AI is used by an elementary school teacher to prepare a lesson
• AI is used by an elementary school teacher to create a multiple choice test
• AI is used by your lawyer to write the legal brief for your lawsuit
• AI is used by your lawyer's paralegal to write the legal brief for your lawsuit
• AI is used to synthesize the court's verdict by the judge deciding your case
• AI is used by a library director to compose the library's strategic plan
• AI is used by a non-profit university to compose the university's strategic plan
• AI is used by a for-profit company to compose the company's strategic plan
• AI is used by a military branch to compose a strategy for military engagement
• AI is used by a government agency to compose a strategy for national security
• AI is used by local law enforcement to compose a strategy for public safety
• AI is used by a summer camp to compose a strategy for camp safety
• AI is used by your doctor to devise the treatment plan for your relative's cancer treatment
• AI is used by a scientist to devise treatments for helping patients with cancer
• AI is used to write a song for your significant other's birthday
• AI is used to write a song for a musical you are creating
• AI is used to write a song for a pharmaceutical company ad on TV
• AI is used by your clergy head to write an annual report
• AI is used by your clergy head to write a sermon
• AI is used by your clergy head to write the eulogy for the funeral of one of your parents

Questions: Are you able to identify any variations in your ethical reasoning and how you decide your positions in the scenarios above?

What are you basing your decisions on? 

Are some scenarios easier or harder for you than others? If so, why?

In which situations, if any, do you think it is okay or not okay to use AI?

What additional information, if any, would you like to know that might help you to make decisions about whether and when the uses of AI are ethical or unethical?

[Excerpt]

I volunteer with our local historical society, which awards a $1,000 scholarship each year to two high school students who submit essays about a meaningful experience with a historical site. This year, our committee noticed a huge improvement in the quality of the students’ essays, and only after announcing the winners did we realize that one of them, along with other students, had almost certainly used artificial intelligence. What to do? I think our teacher liaison should be told, because A.I. is such a challenge for schools. I also feel that this winner should be confronted. If we are right, that might lead her to confess her dishonesty and return the award. — Name Withheld"

Appeals court, weighing Trump’s Library of Congress takeover, reinstates copyright chief; Politico, September 9, 2025

 JOSH GERSTEIN, Politico ; Appeals court, weighing Trump’s Library of Congress takeover, reinstates copyright chief

"A federal appeals court ruled the nation’s top copyright official can continue serving in her post following President Donald Trump’s attempt to fire her.

A divided three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesdaythat Shira Perlmutter is entitled to continue to serve as the register of copyrights at the Library of Congress, despite the White House’s claim that Trump fired her from the post in May.

While the Supreme Court and the D.C. Circuit have permitted Trump to fire a range of executive branch officials who claimed they were protected from dismissal, judges Florence Pan and J. Michelle Childs concluded that Perlmutter’s case was stronger because she doesn’t exercise significant executive power in her job.

“Because Perlmutter leads an agency that is housed in the Legislative Branch and her primary role is to advise Congress, Perlmutter’s situation differs significantly from the Executive Branch officials whose removals have been repeatedly upheld,” Pan wrote, joined by Childs. Both are appointees of former President Joe Biden.

Perlmutter was dismissed days after Trump moved to fire Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden, who has not sought to challenge her ouster in court. The president’s move onto what has traditionally been legislative branch turf has vexed Democrats and some congressional Republicans.

Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, dissented. He said Perlmutter’s claims were too similar to cases the Supreme Court ruled on earlier this year where the justices upheld, for now, Trump’s power to fire members of labor-related boards and the Consumer Product Safety Commission."

Judge Delays Preliminary Approval in Anthropic Copyright Settlement; Publishers Weekly, September 9, 2025

 Jim Milliot, Publishers Weekly; Judge Delays Preliminary Approval in Anthropic Copyright Settlement

"Alsup signaled his discomfort with the proposal in a filing released the evening before the September 8 hearing, writing that he was “disappointed” that attorneys representing the author plaintiffs had left “important questions to be answered in the future, including respecting the Works List, Class List, Claim Form." He was especially concerned for works with multiple claimants with regards to the notification process, voicing worry over what would happen if one party wanted to opt-out of the settlement and the other did not...

In a statement, Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger said the Guild was “confused” by the court’s suggestion that the Guild and AAP were working behind the scenes in ways that could pressure authors to accept the settlement “when that is precisely the opposite of our proposed role as informational advisors to the working group.”

The goal of the working group, which had been proposed by lawyers for the class, “is to ensure that authors’ interests are fully represented and to bring our expertise... to the discussions with complete transparency,” Rasenberger continued. “There are industry norms that we want to make sure are accounted for.”...

AAP CEO Maria Pallante offered an even more vigorous explanation of AAP’s role, as well as the role of the Guild, in the proceedings. “The Association of American Publishers and the Authors’ Guild are not-for-profits that have worked hard to support counsel in the case and to make sure that authors and publishers have the information they need,” Pallante said in a statement. “Unfortunately, the Court today demonstrated a lack of understanding of how the publishing industry works.”"

Faith leaders bring ethical concerns, curiosity to AI debate at multi-denominational conference; Episcopal News Service (ENS), September 5, 2025

 David Paulsen, Episcopal News Service (ENS) ; Faith leaders bring ethical concerns, curiosity to AI debate at multi-denominational conference

"Some of the most tech-forward minds in the Protestant church gathered here this week at the Faithful Futures conference, where participants wrestled with the ethical, practical and spiritual implications of artificial intelligence. The Episcopal Church is one of four Protestant denominations that hosted the Sept. 2-5 conference. About halfway through, one of the moderators acknowledged that AI has advanced so far and so rapidly that most conferences on AI are no longer focused just on AI...

AI raises spiritual questions over what it means to be human

Much of the conference seemed to pivot on questions that defied easy answers. In an afternoon session Sept. 3, several church leaders who attended last year’s Faithful Futures conference in Seattle, Washington, were invited to give 10-minute presentations on their preferred topics.

“What happens to theology when the appearance of intelligence is no longer uniquely human?” said the Rev. Michael DeLashmutt, a theology professor at General Theological Seminary in New York, New York, who also serves as the Episcopal seminary’s senior vice president.

DeLashmutt argued that people of faith, in an era of AI, must not forget what it means to be Christian and to be human. “Being human means being relational, embodied, justice-oriented and open to God’s spirit,” he said. “So, I think the real risk is not that machines will become human, but that we will forget the fullness of what humanity actually is.”

Kip Currier, a computing and information professor at the University of Pittsburgh, warned that AI is being used by sports betting platforms to appeal to gamblers, including those suffering from addiction. Mark Douglas, an ethics professor at Columbia Theological Seminary, outlined the ecological impact of AI data centers, which need to consume massive amounts of energy and water.

The Rev. Andy Morgan, a Presbyterian pastor based in Knoxville, Tennessee, described himself as his denomination’s “unofficial AI person” and suggested that preachers should not be afraid of using AI to improve their sermons – as long as they establish boundaries to prevent delegating too much to the technology."

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. 

Anthropic settles with authors in first-of-its-kind AI copyright infringement lawsuit; NPR, September 5, 2025

 Chloe Veltman , NPR; Anthropic settles with authors in first-of-its-kind AI copyright infringement lawsuit

"In one of the largest copyright settlements involving generative artificial intelligence, Anthropic AI, a leading company in the generative AI space, has agreed to pay $1.5 billion to settle a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by a group of authors.

If the court approves the settlement, Anthropic will compensate authors around $3,000 for each of the estimated 500,000 books covered by the settlement.

The settlement, which U.S. Senior District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco will consider approving next week, is in a case that involved the first substantive decision on how fair use applies to generative AI systems. It also suggests an inflection point in the ongoing legal fights between the creative industries and the AI companies accused of illegally using artistic works to train the large language models that underpin their widely-used AI systems.

The fair use doctrine enables copyrighted works to be used by third parties without the copyright holder's consent in some circumstances, such as when illustrating a point in a news article. AI companies trying to make the case for the use of copyrighted works to train their generative AI models commonly invoke fair use. But authors and other creative industry plaintiffs have been pushing back.

"This landmark settlement will be the largest publicly reported copyright recovery in history," the settlement motion states, arguing that it will "provide meaningful compensation" to authors and "set a precedent of AI companies paying for their use of pirated websites."

"This settlement marks the beginning of a necessary evolution toward a legitimate, market-based licensing scheme for training data," said Cecilia Ziniti, a tech industry lawyer and former Ninth Circuit clerk who is not involved in this specific case but has been following it closely. "It's not the end of AI, but the start of a more mature, sustainable ecosystem where creators are compensated, much like how the music industry adapted to digital distribution.""

Time; TIME100 AI 2025

 Time; TIME100 AI 2025

Meet the innovators, leaders, and thinkers reshaping our world through groundbreaking advances in artificial intelligence.

DHS references Mexican IndyCar driver to promote ‘Speedway Slammer’ detention center; The Guardian, August 7, 2025

 Agencies , The Guardian; DHS references Mexican IndyCar driver to promote ‘Speedway Slammer’ detention center

[Kip Currier: Not only is this statement by a DHS spokesperson factually inaccurate, as there's a cogent argument these actions by DHS may negatively impact trademark rights (and rights of publicity) -- “An AI generated image of a car with ‘ICE’ on the side does not violate anyone’s intellectual property rights" -- it's also morally offensive to either recklessly or intentionally appropriate without permission the racing number of one of the top Mexican drivers for use in a DHS promotion that demeans human beings.]

[Excerpt]

"IndyCar driver Pato O’Ward and series officials were shocked by a social media post from the Department of Homeland Security that touts plans for an immigration detention center in Indiana dubbed “Speedway Slammer.” It includes a car with the same number as that of O’Ward, the only Mexican driver in the series.

“It caught a lot of people off guard. Definitely caught me off guard,” O’Ward said Wednesday. “I was just a little bit shocked at the coincidences of that and, you know, of what it means ... I don’t think it made a lot of people proud, to say the least.”

The post on Tuesday included an AI-generated image of a IndyCar-style vehicle with O’Ward’s No 5 that has “ICE” stamped on it. In the image, the car is in front of a jail...

“We were unaware of plans to incorporate our imagery as part of yesterday’s announcement,” IndyCar said in a statement Wednesday. “Consistent with our approach to public policy and political issues, we are communicating our preference that our IP not be utilized moving forward in relation to this matter.”

A DHS spokesperson said it would not change the social media post. “An AI generated image of a car with ‘ICE’ on the side does not violate anyone’s intellectual property rights. Any suggestion to the contrary is absurd,” the spokesperson said in statement. “DHS will continue promoting the ‘Speedway Slammer’ as a comprehensive and collaborative approach to combatting illegal immigration.”