As the high‑profile copyright lawsuits against AI companies proceed, the courtroom drama captures headlines. But I’ve long thought that settlement may be the real outcome to watch.
We may already be entering “settlement watch” territory in one of the fastest-moving AI cases, Bartz v. Anthropic.
Back in October, I asked a simple but unresolved question: “Who represents you in the AI copyright suits?” Now, eight months later, we’re getting closer to an answer—at least for some authors. In Bartz v. Anthropic, one of the fastest-moving lawsuits over the use of copyrighted works to train generative AI systems, the plaintiffs have asked the court to certify a class of authors whose books were allegedly copied without permission.
[Update On September 10, the D.C. Circuit granted Perlmutter’s request for an injunction pending appeal, reinstating her as Register of
The last few days have been quite dramatic for anyone paying attention to copyright law and policy. The Generative AI
In late March, OpenAI made it possible to “Ghiblify” yourself — using its newest version of ChatGPT, with updated image
Below is an interview with Charles Watkinson, Director of the University of Michigan Press and Associate University Librarian for Publishing
Chinese courts are recognizing AI-generated works as copyrightable, and these rulings could potentially impact those in the US under certain circumstances.
On March 3, librarians, authors, publishers, and technologists gathered at Northeastern University Library in Boston to contribute to a startup
Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its ruling in Thaler v. Perlmutter, a
We’ve heard from lots of authors with questions about AI licensing of their works by their publishers. Cambridge University Press
