All posts tagged: Copyright

Devious New AI Tool “Clones” Software So That the Original Creator Doesn’t Hold a Copyright Over the New Version

Devious New AI Tool “Clones” Software So That the Original Creator Doesn’t Hold a Copyright Over the New Version

Published by José Betancourt

Sign up to see the future, today Can’t-miss innovations from the bleeding edge of science and tech The advent of generative AI continues to undermine the very concept of copyright, from entire books shamelessly ripping off authors to tasteless AI slop depicting beloved characters going viral on social media. The sin is foundational: all today’s popular AI tools were built by pillaging copyrighted material without permission. Even software isn’t safe. As 404 Media reports, a new tool dubbed Malus.sh — pronounced “malice,” to give a subtle clue where this is headed — uses AI to “liberate” a piece of software from existing copyright licenses, essentially creating a “clean room” clone that technically doesn’t infringe on the original code’s copyright. The project is a tongue-in-cheek jab at tensions in the open source community. But it’s also a real product being developed by an LLC with real paying customers. “It works,” cofounder and United Nations political economy of open source software researcher Mike Nolan told 404. He argued that if it were “just satire,” it would largely …

Agency faces ‘£100,000’ legal costs from Mail and Telegraph over £200 pictures claim

Agency faces ‘£100,000’ legal costs from Mail and Telegraph over £200 pictures claim

Published by Sam Flores

Mahsa Amini picture initially used by Mail Online sourced from Facebook A news agency journalist says the Mail and Telegraph have racked up around £100,000 in legal fees defending claims for picture usage worth less than £200. The case centres around the long-standing practice of news agencies billing retrospectively on a per-use basis for words and images sent out to publications. Costs have mounted as the publishers have employed specialist external legal counsel to fight the small claims court cases in hearings and exchanges of legal letters. Michael Leidig and Central European News sued The Telegraph over a picture of Joseph Bynans, who died in a shark attack in Mexico. The picture was sourced from social media, but CEN claims to have sourced and verified the picture and embedded a digital provenance marker in it to prove usage. The Daily Mail claim relates to a picture of Iranian woman Mahsa Amini, who was beaten to death in Iran in 2022 for not wearing a headscarf. Again the picture was sourced from social media and verified …

UK Government backs down on plan to weaken copyright in favour of AI firms

UK Government backs down on plan to weaken copyright in favour of AI firms

Published by Sam Flores

The “Make It Fair” campaign branding on several national UK news sites and the front covers of national newspapers. Picture/screenshots: Press Gazette The UK Government has withdrawn its support for plans to make it easier for AI companies to steal copyright content. The move follows a campaign led by the News Media Association, which saw every UK national newspaper and website give over their front pages to the slogan “Make It Fair”. The Government previously favoured proposals to automatically allow AI businesses like OpenAI to ingest UK creators’ content until those creators explicitly opt out. Secretary of State for Science and Technology Liz Kendall said: “We believe that people should be paid fairly for the work that they do. It should not be that only the big and powerful can assert their rights. We also believe that championing innovation is critical to new discoveries, creating growth, driving social mobility, and allowing new talent and ideas to break through.” She set out a core commitment that the Government “will help creatives control how their work is …

New AI licensing scheme helps smaller publishers strike deals with platforms

New AI licensing scheme helps smaller publishers strike deals with platforms

Published by Sam Flores

AI apps. Picture: Shutterstock/Tada Images A new collective licensing scheme for the “fair and lawful” use of content in AI products has launched in the UK. The project is being led by non-profit organisation Publishers’ Licensing Services (PLS) and is open to all types of small and large content publishers including magazines, digital news media, books and academic publications (whether they are currently PLS members or not). The aim is to create an online content store that AI companies will be able to access and use for training models and grounding them in up-to-date sources (via retrieval augmented generation or RAG) in exchange for a licence fee. Starting this week, with PLS speaking to book publishers at the London Book Fair, publishers are being asked to opt in to this system and then source the content they want to be included. PLS chief executive Tom West told Press Gazette that if they get it right, “then there is an ongoing and sustainable revenue stream for publishers that simply wasn’t available before”. He said: “We have …

UK May ‘Kick the Can’ On AI Copyright Rules—That Will Hurt Artists Most

UK May ‘Kick the Can’ On AI Copyright Rules—That Will Hurt Artists Most

Published by José Betancourt

Just days after the US Supreme Court said it would not reconsider whether art generated by artificial intelligence can receive copyright protection, the UK has looked set to make its own major decision on AI and copyright. For the past two months, the UK government has been consulting on a legal overhaul of its intellectual property laws, with a particular focus on AI. An economic impact assessment, along with an update on the consultation, is due on March 18, with final results to follow sometime afterward. Related Articles One of the main proposals, according to the Guardian, would allow AI firms such as OpenAI and Anthropic to use copyright-protected material without the owner’s consent. The idea has understandably drawn considerable backlash from artists—Elton John called the government “absolute losers” over the proposal—as well as from members of Parliament. On Friday, the House of Lords’ Communications and Digital Committee published its own report on AI and copyright, warning that such proposals risk destroying the UK’s £124 billion creative industry for “speculative AI gains.” The report also …

ByteDance’s AI Ambitions Are Being Hampered by Compute Restraints and Copyright Concerns

ByteDance’s AI Ambitions Are Being Hampered by Compute Restraints and Copyright Concerns

Published by skeptic

Move over Sora 2, there’s a hot new AI video model in town. In early February, ByteDance unveiled Seedance 2.0, a major upgrade to its flagship video model, which had previously remained fairly obscure. Its powerful capabilities immediately shocked the AI ecosystem in China, even among audiences who had once been skeptical of AI-generated video and viewed the technology mainly as a way to produce slop. Feng Ji, the founder of Game Science, the studio that developed China’s global hit video game Black Myth: Wukong, wrote online that he was “deeply shocked” by the model’s abilities and believed Seedance 2.0 would pose significant challenges to China’s current copyright regulations and content moderation systems. Pan Tianhong, who leads a Chinese professional video production studio with over 15 million followers on social media, posted a video in which he said Seedance 2.0 is significantly better than any video-making models that came before it. “It thinks like a director,” Pan said. However, most people can’t get their hands on the model at this moment because access remains fairly …

Supreme Court refuses to challenge ruling that denied copyright for AI art

Supreme Court refuses to challenge ruling that denied copyright for AI art

Published by skeptic

The highest court in the land has decided not to hear a case on whether AI-generated art can be copyrighted under U.S. law, as the battle over digital creation continues. On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal involving an artist refused copyright for digital art created by a personal AI software. Plaintiff Stephen Thaler filed for copyright of a piece of moving digital art in 2018. The application was rejected by the U.S. Copyright Office in 2022. The office argued that the Missouri computer scientist’s art was not eligible for copyright protection because it was not created by a human. SEE ALSO: AI has made us all surveillance targets. This tool helps you fight back. The decision preceded a 2025 report by the U.S. Copyright Office that offered further interpretation of the law and eligibility for copyright shelter, writing that “unedited outputs of generative AI tools” wouldn’t qualify for protection. The report added that art facilitated by AI but “retained the centrality of human creativity” could be eligible, but not expressive …

Perplexity claims News Corp tried to ‘entrap’ its AI chatbot

Perplexity claims News Corp tried to ‘entrap’ its AI chatbot

Published by Sam Flores

Perplexity response to question about original Wall Street Journal reporting (query posed on 2 March 2026, sources no longer include Wall Street Journal) Perplexity has accused Dow Jones and the New York Post of carrying out a fishing exercise and “entrapment” by attempting to encourage its AI chatbot to spit out verbatim copies of its articles to back up their copyright claim. Perplexity wrote to a New York judge last week arguing the News Corp subsidiaries should be forced to hand over records showing the hundreds of queries they made to “fish” for a basis to sue within its AI search tool before launching the claim in October 2024. Perplexity told Judge Katherine Failla: “This discovery would reveal an inconvenient truth: Plaintiffs repeatedly and deceptively crossed the line from investigation to entrapment.” Perplexity is arguing that the publishers have no privilege over the information shared in its search tool because it was entered into its platform with the intention to sue. News Corp subsidiaries Dow Jones (which publishes the Wall Street Journal and Barron’s Group) …

Supreme Court Declines to Reconsider Copyright Case on AI Art

Supreme Court Declines to Reconsider Copyright Case on AI Art

Published by Jenni Sidey

The US Supreme Court said on Monday that it will not hear a case over whether art by artificial intelligence can recieve copyright protection. The decision all but ends the years-long quest by computer scientist Stephen Thaler to have art crafted by his AI system “DABUS” recieve federal copyright protection. In a 2024 profile in Art in America, Thaler told Shanti Escalante-De Mattei that he viewed DABUS as a “proto-conciousness” capable of experiencing stress and trauma. Gaining copyright protection, as Thaler painted it, was about affirming the agency of his AI model, rather than ensuring some financial benefit. “Is DABUS an inventor? Or is he an artist?” he said at the time. “I don’t know. I can’t tell you that. It’s more like a sentient, artificial being. But I even question the artificial part.” Related Articles Thaler’s quixotic quest began when he submitted a federal copyright registration in 2018 for the artwork A Recent Entrance to Paradise, produced during one of his many experiments with DABUS. The Copyright Office rejected the application in 2022, determining …

The Piracy Problem Streaming Platforms Can’t Solve

The Piracy Problem Streaming Platforms Can’t Solve

Published by skeptic

“The trade-off isn’t only ethical or economic,” Andreaux adds. “It’s also about reliability, privacy and personal security.” Abed Kataya, digital content manager at SMEX, a Beirut-based digital rights organization focused on internet policy in the Middle East and North Africa, says piracy in the region is shaped less by culture than by structural barriers. “I see that piracy in MENA is not a cultural choice; rather, it has multiple layers,” Kataya tells WIRED Middle East. “First, when the internet spread across the region, as in many other regions, people thought everything on it was free,” Kataya says. “This perception was based on the nature of Web 1.0 and 2.0, and how the internet was presented to people.” Today, he says, structural barriers still lead many users towards illegal platforms. “Users began to watch online on unofficial streaming platforms for many reasons: lack of local platforms, inability to pay, bypassing censorship and, of course, to watch for free or at lower prices.” Payment access also remains a major factor. “Not to mention that many are unbanked, …