当地时间12月22日，两届普利策新闻奖得主约翰·卡雷鲁牵头的作家群体，向美国加州北区地方法院提起集体诉讼，将 OpenAI、谷歌、Meta、Anthropic、xAI及Perplexity AI六家AI巨头列为共同被告，指控其通过盗版书籍训练模型构成"蓄 意侵权"。卡雷鲁曾揭露了硅谷血液检测创业公司Theranos的惊天骗局，并据此出版书籍《滴血成金》。 早在2023年底，《纽约时报》就侵犯版权起诉微软和OpenAI，称报纸发表的数百万篇文章被用于训练智能聊天机器人 （如微软Copilot和ChatGPT ）。《纽约时报》认为，被告应为非法复制和使用《纽约时报》独特而有价值的作品相关 的数十亿美元的损失负责。同时，《纽约时报》还要求被告销毁使用其版权材料的任何AI模型和训练数据。 而在今年6月，OpenAI发表声明称，正在对《纽约时报》要求无限期保留消费者ChatGPT和API客户数据的诉讼请求提 起上诉。OpenAI认为这项诉讼请求从根本上违背了其对用户做出的隐私承诺，是越权行为。 与《纽约时报》有版权纠纷的不只OpenAI。去年10月，《纽约时报》还向生成式AI初创公司Perplexity发出"停止并终 ...

Core Viewpoint - Disney, Universal Pictures, and Warner Bros. Discovery have jointly filed a lawsuit against Chinese AI company MiniMax and its international operations in Singapore, Nanonoble Pte Ltd, accusing them of large-scale intellectual property infringement through their product "Hailuo AI" [1][3]. Group 1: Allegations of Infringement - The lawsuit includes 58 pieces of evidence claiming that MiniMax's "Hailuo AI" has unlawfully copied and reproduced copyrighted works during its training and generation processes, violating the U.S. Copyright Act [1][3]. - MiniMax is accused of unauthorized downloading of copyrighted works from the internet for model training, embedding core elements of these works into their AI model [9]. - The AI model can generate high-quality images and videos based on simple text prompts, which include copyrighted characters, leading to claims of direct infringement [11][12]. Group 2: Legal Context and Implications - Legal experts indicate that determining whether AI model training constitutes copying or merely inspiration is complex, and settlements between copyright holders and AI companies are more common than litigation [2][18]. - The lawsuit seeks to recover profits from MiniMax's infringement and requests a permanent injunction to prevent further use of the plaintiffs' works for AI training and content generation [13]. - The case reflects a broader trend in the industry, where AI companies face increasing scrutiny and potential legal challenges regarding copyright issues as the sector rapidly expands [2][22]. Group 3: Industry Impact - MiniMax, valued at approximately $4 billion and currently in Series C funding, has been accused of undermining the legitimate licensing market through its alleged infringement activities [13]. - The lawsuit is part of a larger pattern, as similar legal actions have been taken against other AI companies, indicating a growing concern among content creators regarding the use of their intellectual property [13][21]. - The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how AI companies navigate copyright laws and the potential for future collaborations or settlements with content owners [21][22].

Core Viewpoint - The copyright battle between Hollywood and AI has escalated, with major studios suing the domestic company MiniMax for copyright infringement related to its AI product "Hai Luo AI" [2] Group 1: Legal Action and Allegations - Disney, Universal Pictures, and Warner Bros. have jointly filed a lawsuit against MiniMax, claiming that "Hai Luo AI" unlawfully reproduces and displays copyrighted works without authorization [2] - The lawsuit accuses MiniMax of not only direct infringement but also of aiding infringement, thus holding it liable for joint responsibility [2] - The plaintiffs include major Hollywood entities such as Marvel, Disney, 20th Century Fox, DC Comics, and DreamWorks, while the defendants include MiniMax's parent company Shanghai Xiyu Technology and its international operations company Nanonoble Pte Ltd [2] Group 2: MiniMax Overview and Product Details - MiniMax, founded in 2021 by former SenseTime vice president Yan Junjie, is one of the "six little dragons" of domestic AI startups, focusing on international expansion [4] - The company claims its self-developed multimodal models and AI applications cover over 200 countries and regions, with 157 million individual users [4] - "Hai Luo AI" specializes in generating images and videos from text prompts, and it gained significant traction in the U.S. AI application market, ranking among the top ten downloads in the first half of 2024 [4] Group 3: Allegations of Inaction and Evidence - The plaintiffs argue that MiniMax had the capability to prevent copyright infringement but chose not to, despite having systems in place to filter out violent and explicit content [6] - A letter from the plaintiffs' lawyers listed around 50 infringing characters, including Iron Man and Spider-Man, but MiniMax did not respond or take down the content [6] - MiniMax has been using copyrighted characters in promotional videos on social media platforms, with specific posts cited as evidence in the lawsuit [7] Group 4: Financial Implications and Demands - MiniMax is currently in its C-round of investment, having previously received funding from major investors like Alibaba, Tencent, and Sequoia China, with an estimated valuation of approximately $4 billion [7] - The lawsuit seeks compensation for actual damages or statutory damages, which could total up to $7.5 million based on the 50 works mentioned [8] - The plaintiffs also request a court injunction to prevent MiniMax from continuing to infringe on copyrighted works and to implement appropriate copyright protection mechanisms in "Hai Luo AI" [8]

Core Viewpoint - Perplexity AI is facing legal action from major Japanese news outlets, including Nikkei and Asahi, for allegedly violating copyright laws by bypassing content protection measures and providing inaccurate AI-generated summaries of their articles [1][3]. Group 1: Legal Actions - Nikkei and Asahi have jointly filed a lawsuit against Perplexity AI, following a similar action initiated by Yomiuri Shimbun earlier this month [1]. - The lawsuit claims that Perplexity AI collected articles from the servers of Nikkei and Asahi without permission, creating and disseminating summaries that violate Japanese copyright regulations [3]. Group 2: Allegations and Demands - The two news organizations allege that the AI-generated summaries provided by Perplexity are not accurate and fail to faithfully represent the original content, thereby damaging their reputation and infringing on their commercial interests [3]. - Nikkei and Asahi are seeking a court order from the Tokyo District Court to stop Perplexity AI from using their content and to delete the summaries, along with a combined economic compensation of 2.2 billion yen (approximately 107 million RMB) [3].