Recently, five major Canadian media organizations have jointly filed a lawsuit against the AI company OpenAI, accusing it of using their copyrighted content without authorization to train ChatGPT. These media organizations include Torstar, Postmedia, The Globe and Mail, The Canadian Press, and CBC/Radio-Canada. According to the lawsuit, OpenAI used their content in the development of its GPT model.

The New York Times and the Daily News encountered an unexpected twist in their copyright lawsuit: an OpenAI engineer inadvertently deleted virtual machine search data that could have been key evidence, adding a dramatic turn to this high-profile legal dispute. According to a letter submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Wednesday night, lawyers and technical experts for the two media companies had previously invested over 150 hours searching OpenAI's AI training dataset. However, on November 14, an OpenAI engineer accidentally deleted data stored on the virtual machine.

Recently, the Southern District Court of New York dismissed the copyright infringement lawsuit against OpenAI filed by Raw Story Media, Inc. and AlterNet Media, Inc., stating that the case lacked standing. This ruling marks an important victory for OpenAI in the legal disputes between AI and copyright, providing a reference for handling similar cases in the future. Raw Story and AlterNet are two online news outlets primarily focused on leftist perspectives.

Following the New York Times, the New York Post (NYP Holdings) and the Wall Street Journal (Dow Jones) have recently jointly filed a lawsuit against the AI company Perplexity AI in federal court in Manhattan, accusing it of 'mass illegal copying' of copyright works from these two media outlets. This AI startup, backed by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, is facing serious copyright infringement charges. The lawsuit demands that Perplexity cease using these news articles to respond to queries.

In a recent lawsuit that has drawn widespread attention, Meta's CEO Mark Zuckerberg is set to testify. This lawsuit is initiated by a group of writers, including renowned comedian Sarah Silverman, who accuse Meta of infringing their copyrights in the application of artificial intelligence technology. The core issue of the lawsuit is whether Meta's platforms like Instagram and Facebook have potentially used their works without authorization while generating content.

A San Francisco-based AI startup, Anthropic, is facing a lawsuit from a group of writers for allegedly using a large number of pirated books in the training of its chatbot Claude. This marks the first time writers have filed a lawsuit against Anthropic, accusing its actions of 'mocking its lofty goals' and utilizing pirated resources to build AI products. The complaint states that Anthropic is attempting to profit from the human expression and creativity behind each work. The plaintiffs include writers Andrea Bartz and Charles Graeb.

In a pivotal copyright infringement lawsuit, a judge ruled that visual artists' lawsuits against well-known AI image and video generation companies can proceed and enter the discovery phase. The artists accuse these companies of using their works without permission to train AI models, including Midjourney, Runway, Stability AI, and DeviantArt. The crux of the case is whether the AI companies constitute 'induced infringement.' The judge indicated that the allegations are strong enough to warrant further investigation.

Recently, the Japanese publishing industry has issued a stern warning about AI-driven search engines, arguing that these emerging technologies are eroding the foundations of the news industry. The Japan Newspaper Publishers and Editors Association has stated that AI search engines are exploiting the content of news media without fair compensation, a phenomenon known as "free-riding." This means that AI systems profit from news content without providing support for its creation and the news ecosy

The non-profit Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR), known for producing in-depth reports such as 'Mother Jones' and 'Reveal', announced on Thursday that it will file a lawsuit against Microsoft and OpenAI, accusing the two companies of using its content without permission and infringing copyright. Previously, The New York Times and several other media outlets have also taken similar legal actions.

The Center for Investigative Reporting (CIR) accuses OpenAI and Microsoft of using copyrighted materials to train their AI models. A complaint filed in federal court in New York alleges that OpenAI used CIR's content without permission or payment.

Several major record labels have jointly sued two AI startups, accusing them of using copyrighted music without permission to train their music generation models, resulting in audio that infringes on commercial copyrights. The lawsuit was coordinated by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and involves the defendants Uncharted Labs, which developed Udio, and Suno, based in Massachusetts.

Recently, the Beijing Internet Court held online hearings for four copyright infringement cases filed by illustrators against the developers and operators of AI art software. The plaintiffs in these cases are all renowned illustrators who discovered that their original works, published on a content-sharing platform, were extensively mimicked by the AI art software and used as training material to generate new artworks. These AI-generated artworks not only closely resemble the style of the plaintiffs' works but are also used heavily for commercial purposes, severely harming the interests of the plaintiffs.

Three authors have sued Nvidia for using their copyrighted books without permission to train the NeMo AI platform. The lawsuit claims that the authors' works became part of a dataset consisting of approximately 196,640 books. The authors assert that their works were removed after training in NeMo. Nvidia has not issued a formal response to the case, which could set a significant precedent for copyright in the AI field.

The Intercept, Raw Story, and AlterNet accuse OpenAI and Microsoft of deliberately removing important copyright information from news articles. The plaintiffs claim that ChatGPT copied copyrighted news works during its training, omitting authors, titles, and copyright information. OpenAI and Microsoft are accused of willfully knowing that ChatGPT could infringe copyright, potentially leading to user dissatisfaction and decreased revenue.

The Guangzhou Internet Court ruled on the world's first case of a generative AI service infringing another's copyright. In the early stages of the generative AI industry development, it is necessary to balance rights protection and industry growth. Shanghai Xinchuanghua Company discovered that Guangzhou Nianguang Company's website could generate images identical or similar to the Ultraman character involved in the case. Companies providing AIGC services that can generate Ultraman series images through AI artistry lost the lawsuit. The court ruled that the company infringed the plaintiff's rights to reproduction and adaptation of the Ultraman character in question, ordering it to cease infringement and compensate the plaintiff 10,000 yuan.

Digital watermarking combined with artificial intelligence accelerates the resolution of copyright infringement cases. Courts will obtain more evidence from the integration of digital watermarking and artificial intelligence. The use of more complex watermarks will lead to faster and more accurate solutions. Artificial intelligence can expedite the resolution of 3D printing copyright disputes and optimize processes before online copyright infringement hearings.

OpenAI is in negotiations with media companies such as CNN, Fox, and Time Magazine to license articles, videos, and images in order to enhance its ChatGPT chatbot product. These negotiations come in the context of allegations of copyright infringement, following a lawsuit filed by The New York Times against OpenAI. OpenAI is also engaging with industry organizations like the News/Media Alliance to explore opportunities and address related concerns.

The latest update of Midjourney's V6 version has led to user complaints about generated artwork being similar to known copyrighted pieces. Artist Reid Southen discovered that the generated images resembled scenes from several movies and was subsequently banned by Midjourney. AI researcher Gary Marcus expressed concern, speculating that high-resolution copyrighted images may have been used, with the company not responding to the allegations. In response to the criticism, Midjourney banned Southen and revised their terms of service, emphasizing the importance of not infringing intellectual property rights. Artists have accused AI-generated content...