Thousands of authors urge AI companies to stop using work without permission; Morning Edition, NPR, July 17, 2023

 Chloe Veltman, Morning Edition NPR; Thousands of authors urge AI companies to stop using work without permission

"Thousands of writers including Nora Roberts, Viet Thanh Nguyen, Michael Chabon and Margaret Atwood have signed a letter asking artificial intelligence companies like OpenAI and Meta to stop using their work without permission or compensation."

Poet and translator to sue British Museum for copyright and moral rights infringement; The Art Newspaper, July 7, 2023

Anny Shaw, The Art Newspaper; Poet and translator to sue British Museum for copyright and moral rights infringement

"Sharples notes that the legal case will not only focus on copyright, but also Wang’s moral rights, in particular the right to attribution—or the right to be named or identified as the author."

Some of Trump’s New NFTs Look Like Photoshops of Google Search Results; PetaPixel, December 16, 2022

 JARON SCHNEIDER, PetaPixel; Some of Trump’s New NFTs Look Like Photoshops of Google Search Results

"After hyping a major announcement, Donald Trump revealed his next major project: NFTs. But reverse image searches of some of the “digital trading cards” revealed them to be edits of clothing easily found in Google search, raising copyright questions...

While these images aren’t what most would consider to be the height of photographic art, they are still photos that are presumably owned by a manufacturer and using images — even e-commerce photos — without permission in this manner brings up copyright questions: it may not be legal, not to mention unethical, to just take photos off web stores, turn them into “art,” and then sell them for $99 each.

Gizmodo says it reached out to the manufacturer of both pieces of clothing to ask if either granted the former U.S. President permission to use their images, but neither immediately responded." 

Podcaster Sued for Copyright Infringement for Using Music without Permission - Remember ASCAP, BMI and SESAC Licenses Don’t Cover All the Rights Needed for Podcasting; Lexology, November 29, 2018

Wilkinson Barker Knauer LLP - David Oxenford, Lexology; Podcaster Sued for Copyright Infringement for Using Music without Permission - Remember ASCAP, BMI and SESAC Licenses Don’t Cover All the Rights Needed for Podcasting 

"The bottom line – don’t use music in podcasts without getting permission."

Copyright vs. Conscience: Lawyering Up Isn’t Always the Right Move; PetaPixel, August 21, 2018

Blair Bunting, PetaPixel; Copyright vs. Conscience: Lawyering Up Isn’t Always the Right Move

"You read stories about photographers going after copyright abuse all the time, and it’s nearly always justified. In this case, I hope you can agree with me that seeking monetary compensation through legal recourse was not the right move. Sometimes you have to step back and remember that this may be a business, but it’s a business that relies on people. Once in a while, you have to remember that everyone featured in a photograph is a human, and as such all deserve compassion.

Rest in peace, Old Man."

Why Every Media Company Fears Richard Liebowitz; Slate, May 24, 2018

Justin Peters, Slate; Why Every Media Company Fears Richard Liebowitz

"Key to Liebowitz’s strategy is the pursuit of statutory damages. Under the Copyright Act of 1976, federal plaintiffs can be awarded statutory damages if they can prove “willful” infringement, a term that is not explicitly defined in the text of the bill. (“What is willful infringement? It’s what the courts say it is,” explained Adwar. Welcome to the wonderfully vague world of copyright law!) If a plaintiff had registered the work in question with the Copyright Office before the infringement occurred or up to three months after the work was initially published, then he or she can sue for statutory damages, which can be as high as $150,000 per work infringed. That’s a pretty hefty potential fine for the unauthorized use of a photograph that, if it had been licensed prior to use, might not have earned the photographer enough for a crosstown taxi.

“Photographers are basically small businesses. They’re little men. But you have this powerful tool, which is copyright law,” said Kim, the freelance photographer. The question that copyright attorneys, media executives, and federal judges have been asking themselves for 2½ years is this: Is Richard Liebowitz wielding that tool responsibly? “He offers [his clients] nirvana, basically. He essentially offers them: I will sue for you, I don’t care how innocuous the infringement, I don’t care how innocuous the photograph, I will bring that lawsuit for you and get you money,” said attorney Kenneth Norwick. And the law allows him to do it. So is Liebowitz gaming the system by filing hundreds of “strike suits” to compel quick settlements? Or is he an avenging angel for photographers who have seen their livelihoods fade in the internet age? “They can call Richard Liebowitz a troll,” said Kim. “Better to be a troll than a thief.”...

Over the past 2½ years, Liebowitz has attained boogeyman status in the C-suites of major media organizations around the country. Like the villain in a very boring horror movie featuring content management systems and starring bloggers, his unrelenting litigiousness has inspired great frustration amongst editors and media lawyers fearful that they will be the next to fall victim to the aggravating time-suck known as a Richard Liebowitz lawsuit. And he is probably all of the things his detractors say he is: a troll, an opportunist, a guy on the make taking advantage of the system. He is also a creature of the media industry’s own making, and the best way to stop him and his disciples is for media companies to stop using photographers’ pictures without paying for them—and to minimize the sorts of editorial mistakes borne out of ignorance of or indifference to federal copyright law. “People should realize—and hopefully will continue to realize,” said Liebowitz, “that photographers need to be respected and get paid for their work.”"

States consider tougher web privacy laws; Bloomberg via News Chief, July 6, 2017

Todd Shields, Bloomberg via News Chief; States consider tougher web privacy laws

"Soon after President Donald Trump took office with a pledge to cut regulations, Republicans in Congress killed an Obama-era rule restricting how broadband companies may use customer data such as web browsing histories.

But the rule may be finding new life in the states.

Lawmakers in almost two dozen state capitols are considering ways to bolster consumer privacy protections rolled back with Trump’s signature in April. The proposals being debated from New York to California would limit how AT&T, Verizon Communications and Comcast use subscribers’ data."

Restoring Privacy Protections for Californians; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), June 19, 2017

Kate Tummarello, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Restoring Privacy Protections for Californians

"Californians now have a chance to reclaim crucial online privacy protections.

Earlier this year, Congress narrowly voted to repeal federal privacy rules that kept your ISP from selling information about who you are and what you do online without your permission. Today, California legislators are introducing new state legislation—the California Broadband Internet Privacy Act, A.B. 375 (Chau)— that would effectively reinstate those rules for Internet users in California.

ISPs are our gatekeepers to the Internet, and we shouldn’t have to sacrifice our privacy to these companies just to get online...

With A.B. 375, we have a chance to protect our privacy from ISPs’ privacy violations in California.

Don’t let ISPs put their profits ahead of your privacy. Tell your state representatives to support A.B. 375 (Chau)."

Consumers Less Confident About Healthcare, Data Privacy, and Car Safety, New Survey Finds; Consumer Reports, May 11, 2017

Consumer Reports; Consumers Less Confident About Healthcare, Data Privacy, and Car Safety, New Survey Finds

"Distrust About Data Privacy

There was even wider agreement from consumers across political party lines about their concern over digital privacy. An overwhelming majority—92 percent of Americans—say internet companies and websites should be required to get their permission before selling or sharing their data with other companies. And the same percentage believe internet companies and websites should be required to provide consumers with a complete list of the data they’ve collected about them, if asked.

A full-time worker from the western part of the country made clear the opposing forces at stake online: “Do we want to make money, or look out for the privacy of people?” said the man, 20, who identified himself as independent.

The survey was conducted a few days after Congress passed a resolution, which Trump signed, undoing the FCC’s new broadband privacy rules that would have limited the ability of internet service providers to profit from using consumers’ personal information."