Supreme Court rules ISPs can't be held liable for music piracy - UPI.comTrendingFake passengerRussian tankerDog rescuedMatt BevinGreen fireballIran warCircus performerParatroopersPhilippines emergencyMarch 25, 2026 / 12:41 PMThe U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Internet service providers can't be held responsible for music piracy by their customers, though two liberal judges offered differing reasons for their decisions. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License PhotoMarch 25 (UPI) -- The U.S. Suprem ...

Britannica and Merriam-Webster have filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging that the AI giant has built its $730 billion company on the back of their researched content. In a filing submitted to the Southern District of New York, the companies accuse OpenAI of cannibalizing the traffic and ad revenue that publishers depend on to survive. “ChatGPT starves web publishers, like [the] Plaintiffs, of revenue,” the complaint reads. Where a traditional search engine sends users to a publisher’s website, Britann ...

Core Viewpoint - Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster have filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, claiming that the company used their copyrighted content to train its AI models without permission [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit alleges that OpenAI's ChatGPT reproduces Britannica's copyrighted content in its responses, often verbatim or nearly verbatim [2]. - It is claimed that ChatGPT's summaries of Britannica's content are cannibalizing traffic and that OpenAI reproduces web publishers' copyrighted content without authorization or remuneration [2]. Group 2: Industry Context - The lawsuit reflects a growing trend of content owners suing AI companies for copyright infringement [2]. - Anthropic and Meta previously won lawsuits under the fair use exception, allowing them to use copyrighted content without permission [3]. - Britannica has also filed a lawsuit against Perplexity, which is still pending [3].

Core Viewpoint - Encyclopedia Britannica and its subsidiary Merriam-Webster have filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, claiming copyright infringement and trademark violations due to the alleged scraping of their articles for AI training [1][2][3]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - Britannica alleges that OpenAI's practices "starve web publishers" of revenue and threaten public access to reliable online information [3]. - The lawsuit seeks monetary damages and a court order to prevent further infringement by OpenAI [3]. - OpenAI has responded by stating that its models are trained on publicly available data and are grounded in fair use [4]. Group 2: Context of Legal Actions - In September, Britannica and Merriam-Webster also sued Perplexity for similar reasons, claiming it misused their copyrighted content in its AI-driven answer engine [8]. - Previous lawsuits against AI companies for copyright infringement include a case where Anthropic settled with U.S. authors over the use of pirated books [10].

YouTubers sue Snap for alleged copyright infringement in training its AI models https://t.co/DDotpt40Ba ...

Core Points - Disney has sent a cease-and-desist letter to Google, alleging copyright infringement on a massive scale [1] - The letter claims that Google has used AI models and services to distribute unauthorized images and videos of Disney's copyrighted characters [1][2] - Disney's letter describes Google as operating like a "virtual vending machine" that reproduces and distributes copies of its valuable intellectual property [2] - The infringing images generated by Google's AI services are reportedly branded with Google's Gemini logo, misleadingly suggesting Disney's endorsement [2] - The letter specifically mentions infringement of characters from popular franchises such as "Frozen," "The Lion King," "Moana," "The Little Mermaid," and "Deadpool" [2] - This legal action coincides with Disney's signing of a $1 billion, three-year deal with OpenAI to integrate its characters into the Sora AI video generator [3]

Core Viewpoint - The Walt Disney Company announced a $1 billion investment in OpenAI, allowing users to create AI-generated videos featuring copyrighted characters from franchises like "Star Wars" through the Sora app, amidst ongoing legal disputes with Google over copyright infringement [1][10]. Group 1: Investment and Collaboration - Disney will invest $1 billion in OpenAI, enabling users to generate AI videos with over 200 characters from Disney, Marvel, Pixar, and "Star Wars" [1][4]. - The partnership aims to responsibly extend Disney's storytelling through generative AI while protecting creators and their works, as stated by Disney CEO Bob Iger [5][6]. - Under the three-year deal, Disney will become a major customer of OpenAI, utilizing its APIs for new products and experiences, including for Disney+ [6]. Group 2: Legal Context - Disney has threatened legal action against Google for allegedly using its copyrighted works to develop AI projects without authorization [1][10]. - The cease-and-desist letter from Disney's law firm claims Google is leveraging its market dominance to distribute AI services using Disney's copyrighted characters [7]. - Disney previously collaborated with other major studios to file lawsuits against AI firms like Midjourney and MiniMax for copyright infringement [11][12].

Core Viewpoint - Disney has issued a warning to Google regarding alleged copyright infringement related to the use of Disney's content for training AI models and distributing images and videos, particularly on YouTube, following Disney's $1 billion investment in OpenAI, a competitor of Google [1][4]. Group 1: Copyright Infringement Allegations - Disney claims that Google is infringing its copyrights on a massive scale by using a large corpus of Disney's copyrighted works without authorization to train and develop generative AI models and services [5]. - The letter from Disney demands that Google remove all infringing Disney content from YouTube and YouTube Shorts created with its AI services [2]. - Disney has previously sent cease-and-desist letters to other companies, including Meta and Character.AI, and has filed litigation against Midjourney and Minimax, indicating a broader effort to control piracy of its intellectual property in the AI landscape [3]. Group 2: Competitive Landscape - Disney's investment in OpenAI aims to create a legal framework for accessing its characters and intellectual property, positioning itself against Google in the competitive AI market [4]. - The letter highlights that Google's AI services, including Veo, Imagen, and Nano Banana, are being used to commercially exploit and distribute copies of Disney's protected works, raising concerns about Google's market dominance in generative AI [5]. - Disney's letter emphasizes that Google's actions are flooding the market with infringing works, leading to significant profits from the unlawful exploitation of Disney's copyrights [5].

Core Viewpoint - The Walt Disney Co. has issued a cease-and-desist letter to Google, alleging massive copyright infringement related to its AI training models and services [1] Group 1: Allegations Against Google - Disney claims that Google's infringement is willful and alarming, leveraging its dominance in generative AI to make infringing services widely available [2] - The letter states that Google has refused to implement technological measures to prevent copyright infringement, despite such measures being available and used by competitors [4] - Disney alleges that Google has copied a large corpus of its copyrighted works for training models, including characters from Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, and The Simpsons [5] Group 2: Legal Actions and Context - Disney has previously sent cease-and-desist letters to other companies, including Meta and Character.AI, and is involved in litigation against Midjourney and Minimax [3] - The letter describes Google as operating like a "virtual vending machine," reproducing and distributing Disney's copyrighted works on a mass scale [6] - Disney's letter highlights that many infringing images generated by Google's AI services are branded with Google's Gemini logo, misleading consumers into thinking the use of Disney's IP is authorized [6]

Core Viewpoint - The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against the AI startup Perplexity, alleging repeated copyright violations and competitive practices that harm the publisher's brand [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that Perplexity's AI-powered search engine retrieves and displays large portions of The Times' content, competing directly with the publisher [2]. - The suit also alleges that Perplexity has made up information and falsely attributed it to The Times, damaging the publisher's brand [2]. - The New York Times had previously contacted Perplexity multiple times over the past 18 months, requesting that it cease using its content until an agreement was reached [3]. Group 2: Industry Context - Perplexity's Head of Communication stated that publishers have historically sued new technology companies, suggesting that such lawsuits have not been successful in the past [4]. - The New York Times had signed its first licensing agreement for generative AI content use with Amazon in May, allowing the latter to utilize its content for AI training [5]. - Other companies, including Reddit and Japanese media firms Nikkei and Asahi Shimbun, have also filed lawsuits against Perplexity for unauthorized content use and copyright infringement [5][6]. Group 3: Impact on Credibility - The lawsuits from various publishers claim that Perplexity's AI-generated answers have provided inaccurate information attributed to their articles, which severely damages their credibility [6][7].