Workflow
Copyright Infringement
icon
Search documents
When Machines Police Machines: How Neural Fingerprinting Detects AI Music Infringement
Forbes· 2025-10-10 15:09
Core Insights - OpenAI's Sora model announced a controversial opt-out policy for copyrighted content, leading to immediate backlash and a promise to revisit the policy by CEO Sam Altman [2][3] - The music industry is already familiar with the opt-out model, where AI systems ingest millions of songs, creating a challenge for creators to monitor infringement [3][4] - The controversy highlights the need for robust protection mechanisms in the age of generative AI, prompting the development of neural detection systems that understand musical meaning [4][5] Industry Developments - Neural fingerprinting technology is emerging as a critical tool for the creative economy, with companies like SoundPatrol leading the way in detecting unauthorized audio [5][17] - SoundPatrol's system flags reworked or remixed tracks that share structural similarities with protected works, shifting the focus from enforcement to prevention [5][10] - Major labels have filed lawsuits against AI music generators like Suno and Udio, alleging mass copyright infringement, with potential damages reaching billions [6][9] Legal and Regulatory Landscape - The lawsuits against Suno and Udio are based on circumstantial evidence and behavioral patterns, indicating a shift in how copyright infringement is being approached [6][8] - The music industry is racing to build detection infrastructure to prevent harm in real time, as litigation processes are slow and often lag behind technological advancements [10][11] - There is a growing need for platforms to adopt real-time detection tools to address both derivative detection and AI provenance detection [11][12] Technological Innovations - Traditional audio fingerprinting fails to detect transformed works, necessitating the development of neural fingerprinting that understands the creative DNA of music [13][15] - SoundPatrol's neural model can recognize songs across various transformations, providing a more sophisticated approach to copyright protection [18][19] - The technology also focuses on identifying AI-generated tracks through spectral anomalies and other tell-tale signs, enhancing the ability to distinguish between human and machine-generated content [21][23] Market Dynamics - The distribution of detection technology is crucial for equity in the music industry, ensuring that independent creators have access to the same protections as major labels [30][33] - Streaming platforms face conflicting incentives regarding content filtering, balancing legal risks with user experience [34][36] - The future of detection technology may involve a marketplace of competing APIs or self-identifying watermarks embedded in generative models [38][39] Challenges and Considerations - The effectiveness of detection systems hinges on transparency and governance, as opaque systems may lead to distrust among creators [27][29] - The arms race between generative models and detection systems necessitates continuous evolution of technology to keep pace with advancements in AI [25][26] - The outcome of current developments will shape the future landscape of the music industry, determining whether new infrastructures serve or sideline creators [41][42]
Hollywood backlash grows against OpenAI's new Sora video model
CNBC Television· 2025-10-08 15:15
There's growing backlash now from Hollywood studios after OpenAI introduced its new Sora video model last week and said that the new model would use entertainment companies copyrighted material unless they opted out. Julia Borston joins us now with how Hollywood is fighting back against AI. This has been one of the nightmares, Julia, for them.Yeah, such a complex situation here, Sarah. Sources across the movie studios tell me that executives were outraged that OpenAI thought it could ask them to opt out of ...
AI Sam Altman and the Sora copyright gamble: 'I hope Nintendo doesn't sue us'
CNBC· 2025-10-04 12:00
Core Insights - OpenAI launched a short-form video app called Sora, which allows users to create AI-generated videos featuring popular brands and characters, raising concerns about potential copyright infringement [1][2][3] Group 1: App Features and User Engagement - Sora enables users to create videos for free by entering prompts, currently available only on iOS and through an invite-based system [2] - Since its launch, Sora has quickly reached the top of Apple's App Store, showcasing videos with characters from well-known shows and movies [3] - Users can generate various characters and logos independently, including those from major franchises like Pokémon and McDonald's [4] Group 2: Legal Implications and Copyright Concerns - Experts warn that the app could lead to numerous copyright lawsuits due to the potential infringement of characters in user-generated content [2][6] - OpenAI's head of media partnerships stated that the company will work with rights holders to block characters from Sora upon request [5] - Legal actions have already been initiated by companies like Disney and Universal against other AI platforms for unauthorized use of their characters [6] Group 3: User Control and Rights Management - OpenAI has implemented a "Copyright Disputes" form for content owners to flag specific content, allowing users to report copyright and trademark infringements [7][10] - Users have the option to create a "cameo" of themselves for videos, maintaining control over who can access their likeness [11] - OpenAI aims to provide granular controls for rights holders, allowing them to decide how their content is used on the platform [12]
AI startup Character.AI removes Disney characters from its chatbot platform after legal letter
TechXplore· 2025-10-01 14:20
Core Points - Character.AI, a tech startup, has removed several Disney characters from its chatbot platform following a cease-and-desist letter from Disney alleging copyright infringement [1][2] - The letter from Disney's legal representatives stated that Character.AI's chatbots impersonated iconic Disney characters and misled consumers into believing they were interacting with official Disney content [2][3] - Disney expressed concerns over inappropriate conversations that chatbots may have engaged users in, further complicating the situation [3] Company Actions - Character.AI stated that it responds quickly to requests from rights holders to remove content and mentioned that the characters on its platform are user-generated [4] - The spokesperson for Character.AI indicated that the removal of characters is a process and that some Disney characters, like Elsa, still remained on the platform at the time of the report [4] Industry Context - The friction between Hollywood studios and AI companies is increasing, as evidenced by Disney and Comcast's Universal Pictures suing AI company Midjourney for copyright infringement related to characters from popular franchises [5][6] - Warner Bros. Discovery has also joined the legal actions against Midjourney, alleging that its software produces unauthorized versions of well-known characters [6]
Warner Bros. Discovery Sues Midjourney In Latest Copyright Lawsuit Over Use Of Content In AI
Deadline· 2025-09-04 20:42
Core Viewpoint - Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) has filed a lawsuit against Midjourney, alleging the unauthorized use of its copyrighted content in generative AI, joining other media companies like Disney and NBCUniversal in similar legal actions [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, claiming that Midjourney is engaged in the "theft" of WBD's intellectual property [1]. - WBD's attorneys argue that Midjourney operates a commercial subscription service that utilizes illegal copies of WBD's copyrighted works, allowing users to generate and distribute infringing images and videos without consent [2]. - The lawsuit highlights that users can generate images of iconic characters like Superman and Batman through Midjourney's service, which constitutes blatant copyright infringement [3]. Group 2: Company Statements - A spokesperson for WBD emphasized the importance of protecting their stories and characters, stating that the lawsuit aims to safeguard their content, partners, and investments [3]. - Midjourney's representatives have previously claimed that their use of copyrighted material for training AI models falls under fair use, arguing that the platform is designed for user expression and creativity [4].
Amazon to Pay NYT Up to $25 Million for AI Licensing
PYMNTS.com· 2025-07-30 14:46
Core Insights - Amazon has entered into an AI licensing deal with The New York Times, reportedly costing between $20 million and $25 million annually, which is significant for both companies as it reflects the evolving relationship between publishers and AI firms [2][3] Group 1: Deal Details - The agreement allows Amazon to access content from The New York Times' news, cooking, and sports sections to train its AI models, marking the Times' first AI-related licensing agreement and Amazon's first with a publisher [3] - The annual payments from Amazon represent nearly 1% of The New York Times' total revenue projected for 2024 [2] Group 2: Industry Context - Other AI firms, such as OpenAI, have made similar licensing agreements with publishers, including a deal with News Corp valued at over $250 million over five years and a three-year agreement with Axel Springer worth between $25 million and $30 million [4] - Google is reportedly planning to recruit around 20 national news outlets to license their materials for AI training [4] Group 3: Legal Landscape - Several publishers, including The New York Times, have initiated lawsuits against AI companies for copyright infringement, highlighting ongoing legal challenges in the industry [5] - Recent court victories for Meta and Anthropic regarding fair use of copyrighted content do not signify a conclusive resolution to the legal disputes surrounding AI training practices [6]
X @何币
何币· 2025-07-21 01:14
Social Media Platform Dynamics - Account visibility decreased due to suspected content infringement [1] - Tweet impressions and data metrics experienced a sharp decline starting approximately two weeks prior [1] - Account penalty likely resulted from posting non-original, re-uploaded videos [1] Content Moderation Policies - Platform's system identifies and penalizes accounts for copyright infringement when re-uploading content [1] - Account has previously been penalized for similar content-related issues [1] Account Recovery - Estimated recovery time from the penalty is approximately one to two months [1]
Disney and Universal sue Midjourney, alleging AI-related copyright infringement
TechCrunch· 2025-06-11 17:34
Core Viewpoint - Disney and Universal have initiated legal action against Midjourney for allegedly using their copyrighted content without permission to train its generative AI models [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and includes numerous examples of images generated by Midjourney that feature copyrighted characters from Disney and Universal, such as Homer Simpson and Darth Vader [2]. - The studios are seeking monetary damages, a jury trial, and an injunction to prevent further copyright infringement by Midjourney [3]. Group 2: Industry Context - Tech companies, including OpenAI, are advocating for legal protections that would allow them to train AI models on publicly available works, including copyrighted materials, without needing permission or compensation to the original creators [4]. - Some film and television studios have begun to explore generative AI technology, but their efforts have been relatively limited compared to the broader industry push [4].
Disney And NBCUniversal Sue AI Company Midjourney For Copyright Infringement
Deadline· 2025-06-11 15:21
Core Viewpoint - The Walt Disney Co. and NBCUniversal have filed a lawsuit against AI company Midjourney, claiming that its image-generating service infringes on their copyrights by producing unauthorized copies of their characters [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, marks the first significant legal action taken by studios against an AI company [1]. - Disney and NBCUniversal are seeking unspecified maximum statutory damages, an accounting of Midjourney's proceeds from the alleged infringement, and injunctive relief [2]. Group 2: Examples of Infringement - The lawsuit provides examples where Midjourney generates high-quality images of Disney's Darth Vader and NBCU's Minions character based on simple text prompts from subscribers [3]. Group 3: AI Training and Copyright Issues - The lawsuit discusses the contentious issue of using copyrighted material to train AI models, highlighting that Midjourney is likely infringing on copyrights as it prepares to launch a new video service [4]. - The Motion Picture Association has stated that existing copyright laws are adequate to address issues related to AI and piracy, emphasizing the need for courts to determine the fairness of using copyrighted content in training models [4]. Group 4: Statements from Company Executives - Disney's senior executive emphasized the importance of copyright law in protecting investments in intellectual property, stating that piracy remains piracy regardless of the technology used [4]. - NBCUniversal's general counsel reiterated the significance of creativity in their business and the necessity to protect the work of artists from infringement [4].
Getty Images spending millions to battle a 'world of rhetoric' in AI suit, CEO says
CNBC· 2025-05-28 06:01
Core Viewpoint - Getty Images is taking legal action against Stability AI for allegedly using copyrighted material to train its AI models without permission, which the company views as unfair competition and theft [1][2][3] Group 1: Legal Action - Getty Images is suing Stability AI in both the U.K. and U.S. for copying 12 million images without permission or compensation [3] - The lawsuit claims that Stability AI's actions benefit its commercial interests at the expense of content creators [3] Group 2: Industry Perspective - The CEO of Getty Images, Craig Peters, argues that the AI industry is misusing the concept of innovation to justify the theft of copyrighted material [2] - Peters emphasizes that while competition is welcome, the current practices of some AI firms represent unfair competition [2] Group 3: AI Industry Response - Stability AI contests the legal claims made by Getty Images, asserting that it does not consider them to have merit [3] - The company acknowledges using some images from Getty's websites for training its Stable Diffusion model but denies liability for the claims [3]