Search

The article examines the legal and ethical aspects of a person's responsibility related to the use of the Internet as a means of mass information. It is noted that psychotraumatization by war has become an everyday part of modern life, the media space has changed, which can become a powerful stressor and lead to media trauma of the population and a gradual decrease in the level of its psychological stability. In order to counteract dangerous influences on the Internet, the socialization of the population must be transformed, ensuring stress resistance and mental health of citizens through increasing legal and media literacy. It is noted that a modern person is not only a consumer of content, but also its author, that is, he can freely collect, store, use and distribute information orally, in writing or in another way - as he chooses. However, such information must be disseminated in compliance with the legal norms regarding its authenticity and must not tarnish the honor, dignity and business reputation of other persons, their mental health, i.e. everyone must be aware of their social responsibility for publicizing sensitive information for society. The article describes various types of offenses, such as: cybercrime, phishing, inciting enmity, spreading false information, insult and defamation, copyright infringement, breach of privacy, misuse of Internet resources, spam and unsolicited messages. The features of civil, administrative and criminal liability for the listed offenses are characterized. Also, the article states that persons who distribute illegal content may be held liable. Web resources and their officials can be held responsible only if they ignored the demands of the rights holders to stop copyright infringement or ignored content that is illegal in itself. The article demonstrates that every user must be aware that his actions can have real consequences for himself and other people. It is noted that it is important to adhere to ethical standards, including respect for the privacy of others, credibility and responsibility for the information that is published. Compliance with legal norms and ethical principles is the basis of safe and responsible use of the Internet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the concept of moral rights infringement through defamation of honor under Korean copyright law. It explains that the offense aims to protect the moral rights of authors or performers, including their honor, which is defined as socially recognized honor. The article emphasizes that the risk of harming an author or performer's social esteem or recognition through infringement of their moral rights must be assessed objectively. The courts have established criteria to determine whether an act of infringement is likely to harm the socially recognized honor of the author or performer based on various objective circumstances. [Extracted from the article]

The so-called separation principle, according to which claims for infringement and the validity of a patent are assigned to different specialized courts, is a peculiarity of the German patent system, albeit not unique to it. Much more widespread across Europe is the so-called principle of unity, which provides infringement and validity to be decided jointly at the same court. The drafters of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA), however, did not favour one principle over the other, and thus did not opt for a bifurcated or a non-bifurcated system; rather they decided in favour of a hybrid system. Against this background, at the Unified Patent Court (UPC), the interplay of infringement and validity is rather complex. What this looks like exactly is the focus of this article, which also keeps an eye on the legal situation in Germany. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the present digital age, the dominance of online space for communication requires no introduction. However, the dominance of social media platforms is not unobstructed. The proliferation of social media platforms that claim to respect data privacy is increasingly locking horns with the state, which also seeks to ensure its sovereignty over the digital space. The triadic relationship between the individual/social media user, social media platform, and the state is complex, especially when scrutinised from the rights and privacy-based perspective. Although recent studies raise crucial concerns on the issue of the state’s attempts to achieve digital sovereignty and the response of social media companies on the same, more country-specific studies are needed to grasp the dynamics between the corporations owning social media platforms, the state, and individuals’/users’ rights. Such studies will also help in a more nuanced understanding of the state’s approach to the issues of privacy, online censorship, and the rights of owners against Copyright infringement. This paper aims to explore the standoff between the Indian state and social media platforms on the grounds of privacy, online censorship, and Copyright Infringement. Two key social media platforms selected for the study are Twitter and Telegram since both are well-known social media applications with an enormous user base in India. More importantly, both have been involved in court cases in the country, albeit for different matters. Apart from probing into the content-blocking orders and privacy cases, the paper will examine the rights of the user, who ultimately faces the brunt of the showdown between the powerful entities of the state and the corporation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Text-to-video artificial intelligence (AI) is a new product that has arisen from the continuous development of digital technology over recent years. The emergence of various text-to-video AI models, including Sora, is driving the proliferation of content generated through concrete imagery. However, the content generated by text-to-video AI raises significant issues such as unclear work identification, ambiguous copyright ownership, and widespread copyright infringement. These issues can hinder the development of text-to-video AI in the creative fields and impede the prosperity of China's social and cultural arts. Therefore, this paper proposes three recommendations within a legal framework: (a) categorizing the content generated by text-to-video AI as audiovisual works; (b) clarifying the copyright ownership model for text-to-video AI works; (c) reasonably delineating the responsibilities of the parties who are involved in the text-to-video AI works. The aim is to mitigate the copyright risks associated with content generated by text-to-video AI and to promote the healthy development of text-to-video AI in the creative fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the concerns and issues surrounding the use of generative AI in relation to copyright infringement on literary works. The Authors Guild has expressed concerns about copyrighted books being used to train AI models without permission or compensation. There are debates about whether generative AI can infringe on copyright, as it lacks human creativity and authorship. The fair use doctrine is complex in the context of generative AI and could potentially hinder AI progress or disenfranchise human authors. Authors also worry about the power of large corporations that own generative AI models and the lack of protection and remedies available to them under current copyright law. The U.S. Copyright Office is conducting an inquiry to address these issues and hopes to develop comprehensive guidance on the intersection of generative AI and copyright law. [Extracted from the article]

With the proliferation of digital platforms, the dissemination of literary works has encountered unprecedented challenges, particularly concerning copyright infringement and unauthorized use. This study introduces a comprehensive framework for copyright protection and risk assessment, specifically tailored to online literary works. The framework employs advanced CNN based information extraction (IE) techniques coupled with machine learning (ML) algorithms to identify, classify, and protect literary content against copyright violations. Firstly, we delineate a novel CNN-Decision tree-based IE methodology that systematically harvests metadata and textual content from various online repositories. This process is designed to detect and index online literary works, extracting pertinent features such as authorship, publication date, and textual patterns. Following the extraction, the study utilizes natural language processing (NLP) to analyze and compare content, pinpointing potential instances of copyright infringement by identifying significant overlaps and stylistic similarities with registered works. Subsequently, we introduce a risk assessment model developed through supervised machine learning. This model is trained on a labelled dataset comprising instances of both copyrighted and non-copyrighted works, along with known cases of copyright infringement. By analyzing the extracted features, the model assesses the probability of infringement, categorizing risks into high, medium, and low categories. This stratification allows stakeholders to prioritize enforcement actions and resources efficiently. The study further explores the implementation of various ML algorithms, including decision trees, support vector machines, and neural networks, to determine the most effective approach for copyright protection in the literary domain. We evaluate the models based on accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score metrics, emphasizing their capacity to generalize and operate in dynamic, real-world environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper conducts a systematic review and interdisciplinary analysis of the ethical challenges of generative AI technologies (N = 37), highlighting significant concerns such as privacy, data protection, copyright infringement, misinformation, biases, and societal inequalities. The ability of generative AI to produce convincing deepfakes and synthetic media, which threaten the foundations of truth, trust, and democratic values, exacerbates these problems. The paper combines perspectives from various disciplines, including education, media, and healthcare, underscoring the need for AI systems that promote equity and do not perpetuate social inequalities. It advocates for a proactive approach to the ethical development of AI, emphasizing the necessity of establishing policies, guidelines, and frameworks that prioritize human rights, fairness, and transparency. The paper calls for a multidisciplinary dialogue among policymakers, technologists, and researchers to ensure responsible AI development that conforms to societal values and ethical standards. It stresses the urgency of addressing these ethical concerns and advocates for the development of generative AI in a socially beneficial and ethically sound manner, contributing significantly to the discourse on managing AI's ethical implications in the modern digital era. The study highlights the theoretical and practical implications of these challenges and suggests a number of future research directions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a ruling by the Austrian Supreme Court on the liability for copyright infringement by university lecturers acting in their official capacity. Topics include the official nature of educational activities, the non-liability of universities and professors for such infringements, and the federal government's role in addressing these issues.

Copyright of Environmental & Social Management Journal / Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental is the property of Environmental & Social Management Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are exclusive rights granted by the state to individuals or groups to safeguard their intellectual works. Such works may include inventions, works of art, writings, designs, and trademarks, among others. In Indonesia, IPR is regulated by several laws, including the Patents Law (Law Number 13 of 2016), Copyright Law (Law Number 28 of 2014), and Marks and Geographical Indications Law (Law Number 20 of 2016), among others. These rights encompass copyrights, patents, trademarks, industrial designs, trade secrets, and other related rights. The purpose of IPR protection is to encourage innovation and creativity by providing legal protection for the fruits of intellectual labor, thereby enabling individuals and organizations to reap the benefits of their efforts. The research method used to write this is a normative legal research method. This study found that copyright infringement of two-dimensional artwork and NFT is a form of crime in the digital economy caused by weak legal regulations in cyberspace. Although regulated by the Copyright Law and ITE, protection of digital artwork in Indonesia is still inadequate. This study emphasizes the need for more comprehensive regulations to protect digital artwork and NFT in Indonesia. Stronger regulations will help prevent copyright infringement, provide legal certainty for creators, and strengthen Indonesia's position in the digital economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents an evolutionary game model of the "government‐platform‐platform user" based on the assumption of bounded rationality. The model explores the copyright governance mechanism of user‐generated content (UGC) in China by analyzing the strategic interaction between managers and the managed and the influence of various factors. The findings highlight that the government plays a leading role in the governance mechanism of UGC copyright, and the participation of the platform, as the direct manager of information content, can greatly improve the efficiency of supervision. Increasing government penalties, reducing excess revenue from passive platform filtering, and imposing additional payments for users' infringing use can expedite the adoption of evolutionary stability strategies. Furthermore, there exists a practical threshold for government incentives for platforms. Therefore, the construction and optimization of the UGC copyright governance mechanism need to be supported by a dynamic and coordinated reward and punishment system, diversified business objectives, and continuously improving users' copyright awareness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on an unpublished letter from Thomas Carlyle to his American publisher Abraham Hart, highlighting its significance in the study of Carlyle's publishing history in the U.S. Topics include the challenges Carlyle faced with piracy and the lack of international copyright, the role of Ralph Waldo Emerson in Carlyle's American publications, and the impact of the unpublished letter on understanding Carlyle's publishing dealings.

The article examines the implications of the U.S.Supreme Court's 2023 decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, which marks the Court's first ruling on fair use in visual art in 29 years, emphasizing the challenges courts face in interpreting the "meaning" of art within fair use doctrine. Topics include the difficulties courts encounter in determining art's meaning, the inadequacy of reducing visual art to stable messages.

The article presents the discussions from the first panel of the Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal Symposium, focusing on the implications of the Warhol v. Goldsmith decision for copyright law, particularly the evolving interpretation of fair use. Topics include the role of commerciality in transformative use, the significance of particular uses in fair use analysis, and the broader impact of the decision on existing and new markets for copyrighted works.

The article explores U.S. courts' interpretation of U.S. Code (USC) 1202 which concerns the integrity of copyright management information and offers information on the history of copyright infringement and the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

For decades, copyright scholars have waged a spirited campaign against statutory damages. Our remedial system, critics say, is an incoherent mess. The core problem is that copyright holders can recover a separate award of statutory damages for every infringed work. As a result, damages can rapidly add up in any case involving multiple works. Because the number of statutory awards is tethered to the number of works, even trivial claims can lead to crippling damages. Commentators, policymakers, and judges have criticized this system as arbitrary and overbroad. And yet it endures. This Article argues that copyright's per-work scheme has obscured, and at times eclipsed, a more compelling paradigm of copyright damages--one that attends more closely to the defendant's course of conduct. This new approach would allow courts to examine whether the defendant's actions arose out of, and were rooted in, a single infringement episode. By infringement episode, I mean a chain of infringing acts that together constitute a larger factual event. When the defendant's conduct is traceable to a single episode, courts should issue only a single statutory award--no matter how many works are at stake. This framework, in short, would substitute rigidity for flexibility. It would displace copyright's one-award-per-work scheme and instead introduce a contextual inquiry into the defendant's course of conduct. Doing so can mitigate the risk of outlandish awards, encourage courts to properly calibrate damages, and infuse a degree of much-needed pragmatism into our system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright law is the bedrock of the music industry, governing the ownership, distribution and commercialisation of musical works and sound recordings. It serves as a linchpin that sustains the complex ecosystem made up of users, authors, and owners. Supported by various multifaceted justifications for its existence, the landscape of music copyright law in Malaysia is characterised by diversity and cultural richness. Despite being primarily governed by the Copyright Act 1987, which offers protection for both sound recordings and musical works, there remains a notable lack of awareness regarding the applicability of copyright law and possible infringements. Addressing this is imperative, alongside the need to align Malaysian copyright law with international standards. With the rapid advancement of the global music industry, ongoing efforts are essential to foster a thriving music industry that benefits creators, consumers, and owners. Therefore, this paper aims to comprehensively analyse and understand music copyright law in Malaysia and provide insights into the global issues shaping the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The problem of copyright infringement and law enforcement against the use/sale of fan art without permission on the internet based on Law Number 28 of 2014 is the focus of research on the Director General of IPR Kemenkumham Lampung Regional Office. Normative juridical and empirical juridical methodologies are the methods used in this research. The results showed that the factors of copyright infringement on the use/sale of fan art of others without permission on the internet are the lack of knowledge and understanding of the public to copyright protection, seeking personal gain for commercial purposes, and law enforcement in copyright is still weak. Act No. 28 Year 2014 regulates the offense of complaint against copyright in the form of verbal reprimand through the mass media without a lawsuit for compensation. The author suggests the government, together with IPR institutions, socialize with the public about the importance of copyright, infringement, and its impact and can report if there is a violation with strong evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") has been a flashpoint during most of its twenty-five-year existence. One of the most controversial parts of the DMCA is section 1201. Among other things, section 1201 prohibits third parties from circumventing certain controls to copyrighted content or trafficking in tools that enable circumvention of technological controls. However, despite its nearly quarter-of-a-century lifespan, we know very little about section 1201 empirically. While empiricists have assessed parts of the DMCA, they have left section 1201 largely untouched. Our understanding of section 1201 is largely based on anecdotal evidence, in the form of leading opinions from historically prominent copyright circuits. In this Article, we seek to bolster these anecdotes with greater empirical evidence for ongoing discussions about how section 1201 is performing and whether it needs revising. To do so, we conducted a broad-based search of Westlaw to collect every issued opinion, whether reported or not, where a court purported to apply some part of section 1201. We then reviewed these cases to glean as much information about section 1201 as possible. This review led to a number of important and, in some cases, surprising results. First, section 1201 opinions are a relative rarity. In the nearly quarter of a century since the DMCA's enactment, we could find only a little over 200 opinions, with only about sixty of those being published. The average number of opinions during the DMCA's existence has been around nine annually, which pales in comparison to other types of copyright cases. Second, despite the Second Circuit receiving much attention in anecdotal accounts of section 1201, courts within it issue section 1201 opinions infrequently. The Ninth Circuit is the dominant section 1201 court, both in terms of citations to its opinions and overall number of opinions, and the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits both issue more section 1201 opinions than the Second Circuit. This result stands in contrast to other types of copyright litigation, where the Second Circuit is a behemoth. Third, the most common subject matter in dispute in section 1201 cases is computer software, followed distantly by audiovisual material such as movies. Music stands in last place, showing up in only a couple issued opinions. Debates at the time of the DMCA's enactment were informed by widespread fears of copyright infringement relating to digital music and other types of digital content. Yet section 1201 litigation has resulted in but few written opinions involving those subject matters. Fourth, suits and defaults against individuals happen relatively frequently in the section 1201 context, with courts often assessing large statutory damages against those individuals. As we discuss in this Article, this result raises important equity issues. Fifth, despite section 1201 including a number of statutory exemptions, these exemptions basically never make their way into issued opinions. Fair use, too, only infrequently enters courts' section 1201 discussions. This means, effectively, that the primary way to escape section 1201 liability is through administrative exemptions granted by the Library of Congress on a triennial basis. But as we shall see, this process has significant holes. Finally, plaintiffs disproportionately win section 1201 cases. This result is somewhat bloated because of the frequency of defaults against individuals. Setting these aside, plaintiffs still enjoy tremendous success under section 1201. However, when looking at opinions only outside of the Ninth Circuit, win rates become mostly even. I conclude with several calls for DMCA reform. These include bolstering statutory exemptions and more closely tying section 1201 to copyright infringement. Pursuing these reforms will more faithfully align section 1201 with its purported objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Soochow University Law Edition is the property of Soochow University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Soochow University Law Edition is the property of Soochow University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems, together with text and data mining (TDM), introduce complex challenges at the junction of data utilization and copyright laws. The inherent reliance of AI on large quantities of data, often encompassing copyrighted materials, results in multifaceted legal quandaries. Issues surface from the unfeasible task of securing permission from each copyright holder for AI training, further muddled by ambiguities in interpreting copyright laws and fair use provisions. Adding to the conundrum, the clandestine practices of data collection in proprietary AI systems obstruct copyright owners from detecting unauthorized use of their materials. The paper explores the exceptions to copyright laws for TDM in the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Japan, recognizing their crucial role in fostering AI development. The EU has a two‐pronged approach under the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, with one exception catering specifically to research organizations, and another, more generalized one, that can be restricted by rightsholders. The UK allows noncommercial TDM research without infringement but rejected a broader copyright exception due to concerns from the creative sector. Japan has the broadest TDM exception globally, permitting the nonenjoyment use of works without permission, though this can potentially overlook the rights of copyright owners. Notably, the applicability of TDM exceptions to AI‐produced copies remains unclear, creating potential legal challenges. Furthermore, an exploration of the fair use doctrine in the United States provides insight into its potential application in AI development. It focuses on the transformative aspect of usage and its impact on the original work's potential market. This exploration underscores the necessity for clear, practical guidelines. In response to these identified challenges, this paper proposes a hybrid model for TDM exceptions emerges, along with recommended specific mechanisms. The model divides exceptions into noncommercial and commercial uses, providing a nuanced solution to complex copyright issues in AI training. Recommendations incorporate mandatory exceptions for noncommercial uses, an opt‐out clause for commercial uses, enhanced transparency measures, and a searchable portal for copyright owners. In conclusion, striking a delicate equilibrium between technological progress and the incentive for creative expression is of paramount importance. These suggested solutions aim to establish a harmonious foundation that nurtures innovation and creativity while honoring creators' rights, facilitating AI development, promoting transparency, and ensuring fair compensation for creators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper addresses the scientific problem of enhancing the security and capacity of steganographic methods for protecting digital media. The primary aim is to develop an advanced steganographic technique that optimizes quantization tables to surpass the traditional F5 algorithm in terms of security, capacity, and robustness. The novelty of this research lies in the introduction of the F5A method, which utilizes optimized quantization tables to significantly increase the capacity for concealed information while ensuring high-quality image retention and resistance to unauthorized content recovery. The F5A method integrates cryptographic keys and features to detect and prevent copyright infringement in real time. Experimental evaluations demonstrate that the F5A method improves the mean square error and peak signal-to-noise ratio indices by 1.716 and 1.121 times, respectively, compared to the traditional F5 algorithm. Additionally, it increases the steganographic capacity by up to 1.693 times for smaller images and 1.539 times for larger images. These results underscore the effectiveness of the F5A method in enhancing digital media security and copyright protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evaluations of musical originality are essential to federal copyright infringement litigation. As a primary requirement for copyrightability, originality serves to distinguish commonalities from similarities indicative of copying. Parties to a lawsuit typically hire expert witnesses to aid these forensic assessments. In addition to detailed musical comparisons, experts can curate repertories of pre-existing songs external to the lawsuit, increasingly known as "prior art," to contextualize putative similarities in a lawsuit as more or less likely to be a result of independent creation as opposed to copying. Although seemingly indispensable to legal decision-making processes, the methods and outcomes of prior art analysis remain unregulated and largely undiscussed outside of legal scholarship. Analysis of historical and recent music copyright lawsuits demonstrates that prior art has come to be applied as a proxy measure to appraise the otherwise abstract legal principle of originality. Borrowed from patent law, use of the term prior art in copyright law invokes notions of creation that comes before. To select prior art, experts conduct style and genre analysis to distinguish between musical conventions resulting from technical or historical constraints and innovations specific to the creators involved in a lawsuit. These elements serve as evidence of creative process by which courts may then value the relative originality of an implicated musical passage. The increasingly critical influence of prior art as part of forensic musicological analysis on recent case outcomes presents an urgent need to open cross-disciplinary dialogue about methods of assessing musical originality and creativity, and ultimately, appraisals of music as intellectual property. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The high performance of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLM) in examination contexts has triggered an intense debate about their applications, effects and risks. What legal aspects need to be considered when using LLM in teaching and assessment? What possibilities do language models offer? Statutes and laws are used to assess the use of LLM: – University statutes, state higher education laws, licensing regulations for doctors – Copyright Act (UrhG) – General Data Protection Regulation (DGPR) – AI Regulation (EU AI Act) LLM and AI offer opportunities but require clear university frameworks. These should define legitimate uses and areas where use is prohibited. Cheating and plagiarism violate good scientific practice and copyright laws. Cheating is difficult to detect. Plagiarism by AI is possible. Users of the products are responsible. LLM are effective tools for generating exam questions. Nevertheless, careful review is necessary as even apparently high-quality products may contain errors. However, the risk of copyright infringement with AI-generated exam questions is low, as copyright law allows up to 15% of protected works to be used for teaching and exams. The grading of exam content is subject to higher education laws and regulations and the GDPR. Exclusively computer-based assessment without human review is not permitted. For high-risk applications in education, the EU's AI Regulation will apply in the future. When dealing with LLM in assessments, evaluation criteria for existing assessments can be adapted, as can assessment programmes, e.g. to reduce the motivation to cheat. LLM can also become the subject of the examination themselves. Teachers should undergo further training in AI and consider LLM as an addition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spurred by the rapid modernisation of the sector and the advent of Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), audiovisual (AV) piracy is at epidemic levels, with interventions having limited effect. To date, the dominant themes in interventions have been around personal deterrence (i.e. the threat of legal action) and have not considered other factors that may influence an individual's decision to consume infringing content. In this paper, we consider psychological factors, including perceptions around risk-taking, security behaviours, problematic internet use and personality traits, to gain a comprehensive understanding of factors influencing engagement with IPTV and the potential implications for cyber security. For this purpose, a survey was conducted with 283 participants living in the UK (age range 18–74, male 104), and an integrated structural equation model was constructed. Our findings showed a positive relationship between security behaviours and the perceived risk of viewing IPTV and a negative relationship between the dark personality triad and the perceived risk of viewing IPTV. They suggest that security behaviours fully mediate the relationship between problematic internet use and IPTV risk-taking, indicating a potential new path for anti-piracy interventions with greater efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rise in the popularity of consumer-facing generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has created considerable confusion and consternation among some copyright owners. The ability to automate the generation of original works based on user input is considered by some copyright holders to have been made possible by large-scale direct infringement by OpenAL Microsoft, and other major GenAI developers. This article explores the application of copyright law to the training of OpenAI's ChatGPT, specifically focusing on the legal issues surrounding the unauthorized use of copyrighted textual works in the GenAI training process. The large language models (LLMs) that drive ChatGPT and similar GenAI can summarize written works, generate movie scripts, write poetry, and compose stories nearly instantaneously. LLMs can only function in this way due to the use of vast, diverse training datasets comprised of billions ofwebsites and expansive repositories of books. These datasets are analyzed to study the functionality and syntax of the language, allowing the LLAIs to generate new works. This article discusses the recent lawsuits launched by high-profile authors and copyright owners against OpenAI and Microsoft, claiming direct, vicarious, and derivative infringement. Authors such as George RR Martin, Sarah Silverman, Christopher Golden, and professional organizations such as the Authors Guild contended their works were infringed upon to turn OpenAI into an $80 billion company. In considering the merits of these lawsuits, we discuss the curation and content of training datasets used in the known iterations of ChatGPT and characterize the protectability of the different works the datasets included. We then explore whether the transitory nature Of OpenAI's training process uses acceptable, non-infringing copies and how that would affect the outcome of an actionfor direct infringement. The article then looks at the applicability of currentfair use precedent to textual GenAI and the various types of works used in training datasets. To do so, we apply settled caselaw and leading decisions to discuss OpenAI's use of copyrighted works regarding purpose and character, nature of the original work, the amount and substantiality of the works used, and the impact on the market value of the works by ChatGPT. We pay special attention to other innovative technologies that rely on a fair use defense to draw analogies and comparisons to GenAL Finally, this article considers the policy and legislation of other countries and their approach to ChatGPT and copyright. In doing so, policy considerations are taken into account to argue the necessity of a finding of fair use to maintain international competitiveness and to prevent an erosion of fair use in other sectors outside of GenAL The article concludes that there is substantial support for arguments that GenAI training involves only transitory, non-actionable copying and that it is also permissible underfair use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Synchronization (sync) licenses are required for works in which music is synchronized to video and generally have high transaction costs because they must be individually negotiated. Traditionally, sync licenses were obtained by sophisticated parties for movies, television, commercials, and the like. But digital platforms like TikTok have brought sync licenses from obscurity into the hands of every person with a smartphone. This transformative innovation has created new issues for copyright law. First, usergenerated content (UGC) created by individuals and shared on the internet via social media platforms or websites may require sync licenses that are cumbersome to negotiate and overinclusive. Private agreements between platforms like TikTok and record labels and publishers usually fill the gap, allowing most users to play music with their videos free from concern about copyright infringement. However, these licenses do not account for copyright's fundamental balance between access and exclusivity because they are overinclusive: Some content on TikTok may be covered by the doctrine of fair use, in which case no license is required. Fair use is an affirmative defense to copyright infringement that permits the defendant to use the copyrighted work without paying the rightsholder. Second, TikTok's agreements with labels and publishers could be eroding fair use. The ex-post nature of fair use means that risk-averse parties, when confronted by a situation in which the viability of their claim is unclear, are likely to obtain a license not required by law. This in turn can narrow the scope of fair use because the existence of an active licensing market makes it less likely that a court will find a use is fair. Future parties then become less likely to rely on an increasingly dubious fair use defense. In the TikTok context, doctrine about fair use and sync is especially uncertain. The scant precedent in UGC fair use cases appears to be highly fact-dependent, there are few cases that specifically deal with sync rights, and none of those have decided fair use as applied to sync. This Note proposes a blanket, compulsory license for noncommercial UGC sync as an imperfect solution to help correct the balance of copyright in the digital platform era. The compulsory license would return review of public copyright law back to Congress and courts and prevent private ordering from curtailing fair use. Further, valuable creativity would be protected because rightsholders would not be able to withhold permission for use of copyrighted material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document discusses a legal case in Sweden involving beIN Media Group Ltd.'s television broadcasts. The Swedish Supreme Court ruled that these broadcasts were not protected under the Copyright Act because they were made in Qatar, which was not a party to the Rome Convention at the time. The court considered the transmission chain as one single transmission, and since it originated in Qatar, there was no copyright protection. This case emphasizes the complexities of copyright protection in satellite broadcasting and the significance of international agreements. [Extracted from the article]