From Napster to Sampling to AI: Copyright Law’s Role as the Sheriff to Emerging Technology; JD Supra, August 25, 2026

 Richard Busch , JD Supra; From Napster to Sampling to AI: Copyright Law’s Role as the Sheriff to Emerging Technology

"Copyright law rarely meets new technology at the start. More often, it arrives after technology, and those behind it seeking to push (or ignore) the law for monetary gain have already changed markets, habits, and expectations. In music, that pattern has repeated across many major technological shifts. This article focuses on several: digital sampling, which made fragments of existing recordings newly usable in the studio; digital downloads, which changed the economics of distribution; interactive streaming, which made all music available for license on demand; platform music libraries, which embedded music into social media tools; and artificial intelligence, where those building literally trillion dollar businesses have trained on copyrighted works, and used others’ voice and likeness. In each of these instances, creators and rights holders have had to ask courts, Congress, or regulators to apply existing legal frameworks to commercial realities.

My work in music copyright litigation has often involved a recurring collision between music, technology, and copyright law."

Factors that may support a finding of "willful copyright infringement"; JD Supra, June 3, 2026

 Steve Vondran , JD Supra; Factors that may support a finding of "willful copyright infringement"

"In copyright litigation, identifying the facts that may support a finding of willful infringement can be critical in any case, whether you are on the plaintiff or defense side. A willfulness finding may significantly increase the defendant's financial exposure, including the potential for enhanced statutory damages damages ($30,000-150,000), attorneys' fees, and injunctive relief. Just as important, where the infringement is carried out through a corporation, courts may examine whether company officers, directors, owners, or managers personally participated in, directed, authorized, or financially benefited from the infringing activity. For this reason, copyright plaintiffs should carefully evaluate evidence such as prior notice, cease-and-desist letters, continued use after warning, concealment, removal of copyright management information (17 U.S.C. 1202 claims), repeated infringement, and decision-maker involvement. These facts can help establish not only infringement but also whether the conduct was knowing, reckless, or intentional, which could lead to broader liability against the individuals behind the business. This is what we refer to as "officer and director copyright liability," which allows plaintiffs to name both individuals and their corporations notwithstanding the corporate veil!

Federal courts do not apply a single universal test for "willful infringement" in copyright cases. However, courts repeatedly identify certain facts and circumstances that support a finding that infringement was knowing, intentional, reckless, or undertaken with willful blindness. This blog provides some general concepts to consider in your next infringement matter."