Japanese Man Sentenced For Posting ‘Godzilla’ Spoilers Online; Gizmodo, April 21, 2026

 JAMES WHITBROOK , Gizmodo; Japanese Man Sentenced For Posting ‘Godzilla’ Spoilers Online

39-year-old Wataru Takeuchi was charged for posting plot descriptions of movies and anime series so detailed that a Tokyo court declared them copyright infringement.

"Last week, Asahi (via The Verge) reported that the Tokyo District Court sentenced Wataru Takeuchi to a year and a half in prison, as well as a 1 million yen (roughly $6,300) fine, for running foul of Japan’s copyright laws. Takeuchi was the administrator of an entertainment site littered with articles (and, perhaps most crucially, monetized ad displays, from which Takeuchi made almost a quarter of a million dollars in 2023) that went into great length and spoiler-filled detail to summarize the plots of popular shows and movies."

Supreme Court tosses $1B copyright verdict in record companies' battle over illegal internet downloads; Fox News, March 25, 2026

 Eric Mack, Fox News ; Supreme Court tosses $1B copyright verdict in record companies' battle over illegal internet downloads

"The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Wednesday that internet providers are not liable for copyright infringement by their users, delivering an opinion in Cox v. Sony and tossing a $1 billion verdict."

Supreme Court Sides With Internet Provider in Copyright Fight Over Pirated Music; The New York Times, March 25, 2026

 Ann E. Marimow, The New York Times ; Supreme Court Sides With Internet Provider in Copyright Fight Over Pirated Music

Leading music labels sued Cox Communications for failing to terminate accounts of subscribers flagged for distributing copyrighted music.

"The Supreme Court unanimously said on Wednesday that a major internet provider could not be held liable for the piracy of thousands of songs online in a closely watched copyright clash."

Senators tell ByteDance to ‘immediately shut down’ Seedance AI video app; CNBC, March 17, 2026

 Emily Wilkins, CNBC ;  Senators tell ByteDance to ‘immediately shut down’ Seedance AI video app

"Sens. Marsha Blackburn and Peter Welch are calling for a halt to the new version of ByteDance’s artificial intelligence app, Seedance, which generates videos of real people and licensed characters, raising copyright and intellectual property concerns. 

Seedance 2.0 “is the most glaring example of copyright infringement from a ByteDance product to date, and you must immediately shut down Seedance and implement meaningful safeguards to prevent further infringing outputs,” Blackburn, R-Tenn., and Welch, D-Vt., wrote in a letter to ByteDance CEO Liang Rubo that was first obtained by CNBC.

Their letter is a sign of growing concerns on Capitol Hill about how AI companies are developing and using their models and whether proper protections are in place for those who generate the materials the models train from."

ByteDance’s Controversial AI Video Model Reportedly on Hold Globally Due to Copyright Disputes; Gizmodo, March 14, 2026

 MIKE PEARL  , Gizmodo; ByteDance’s Controversial AI Video Model Reportedly on Hold Globally Due to Copyright Disputes

"According to two anonymous leakers who spoke to the Information, the global release of Seedance 2.0 is on hold amid legal action from movie studios and streaming services.

When it was initially released, Seedance 2.0 appeared to have few if any protections in place to prevent users from generating videos appearing to star celebrities, copyrighted characters, and celebrities as copyrighted characters."

Publishers Charge Anna’s Archive with Copyright Infringement; Publishers Weekly, March 6, 2026

 Jim Milliot  , Publishers Weekly; Publishers Charge Anna’s Archive with Copyright Infringement

"A group of publishers including the Big Five is taking legal action to prevent the pirate website Anna’s Archive from illegally copying and selling their copyrighted material.

In a filing made March 6 in the U. S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 13 book and journal publishers filed suit seeking a permanent injunction to stop Anna’s Archive from copying and distributing millions of infringing files. The suit highlights the magnitude of the material Anna’s Archive has stolen and the unorthodox methods it uses to monetize the material.

In a separate lawsuit brought by Atlantic Recording Corp. in December alleging Anna’s Archive had stolen thousands of audio files from the record label, Atlantic alleged that the website also purported to host “61,344,044 books” and “95,527,824 papers,” as of the December 29, 2025 filing date.

The publishers’ complaint alleges that Anna’s Archive has added over 2 million books and 100,000 papers since Atlantic filed its complaint was filed. The ongoing infringement is in keeping with Anna’s Archive’s goal “to take all the books in the world,” according to the publishers’ complaint."

Hollywood studios escalate dispute over ByteDance’s ‘pervasive copyright infringement’ with its AI tools; Los Angeles Times, February 23, 2026

 Cerys Davies, Los Angeles Times; Hollywood studios escalate dispute over ByteDance’s ‘pervasive copyright infringement’ with its AI tools

"Following the lead of several major Hollywood studios, the Motion Picture Assn. has sent its own cease-and-desist letter to ByteDance, the company behind the controversial artificial-intelligence video generator Seedance 2.0.

The trade association, which represents the interests of major film and TV studios, sent a notice to the Chinese company, reflecting its members’ collective response to “ByteDance’s pervasive copyright infringement.” MPA argues that Seedance’s unauthorized use of copyrighted materials is a “feature, not a bug.” 

The letter, sent Friday, marks the first time the MPA has forwarded a cease-and-desist to a major AI firm and represents a further escalation of tensions between the entertainment industry and an AI company."

ByteDance says it will add safeguards to Seedance 2.0 following Hollywood backlash; CNBC, February 16, 2026

 Dylan Butts, CNBC; ByteDance says it will add safeguards to Seedance 2.0 following Hollywood backlash

"Chinese tech giant ByteDance has said it will strengthen safeguards on a new artificial intelligence video-making tool, following complaints of copyright theft from entertainment giants. 

The tool, Seedance 2.0, enables users to create realistic videos based on text prompts. However, viral videos shared online appear to show copyrighted characters and celebrity likenesses, raising intellectual property concerns in the U.S. 

“ByteDance respects intellectual property rights and we have heard the concerns regarding Seedance 2.0,” a company spokesperson said in a statement shared with CNBC."

Scoop: Disney sends cease and desist letter to ByteDance over Seedance 2.0; Axios, February 13, 2026

Sara Fischer, Axios ; Scoop: Disney sends cease and desist letter to ByteDance over Seedance 2.0

"The Walt Disney Company on Friday sent a cease-and-desist letter to ByteDance, alleging the Chinese tech giant has been infringing on its works to train and develop an AI video generation model without compensation, according to a copy of the letter obtained by Axios.

Why it matters: It's the most serious action a Hollywood studio has taken so far against ByteDance since it launched Seedance 2.0 on Thursday. 

Zoom in: The letter, addressed to ByteDance global general counsel John Rogovin, accuses ByteDance of pre-packaging its Seedance service "with a pirated library of Disney's copyrighted characters from Star Wars, Marvel, and other Disney franchises, as if Disney's coveted intellectual property were free public domain clip art." 

"Over Disney's well-publicized objections, ByteDance is hijacking Disney's characters by reproducing, distributing, and creating derivative works featuring those characters. ByteDance's virtual smash-and-grab of Disney's IP is willful, pervasive, and totally unacceptable," Disney's outside attorney David Singer wrote. 

"We believe this is just the tip of the iceberg – which is shocking considering Seedance has only been available for a few days," he added.

Between the lines: The letter includes a slew of examples of infringing Seedance videos that feature Disney's copyrighted characters, including Spider-Man, Darth Vader, Star Wars' Grogu (Baby Yoda), Peter Griffin from Family Guy and others."

Why are copyright problems plaguing figure skating at the Milan Cortina Olympics?; AP, February 11, 2026

 DAVE SKRETTA , AP; Why are copyright problems plaguing figure skating at the Milan Cortina Olympics?

"One of the recurring issues during the opening week of the figure skating program at the Milan Cortina Olympics has been copyright problems, which have forced some athletes to scramble for approval and others to ditch their planned programs entirely...

Why are copyright problems happening?

The International Skating Union long forbade the use of lyrics in any discipline besides ice dance, forcing athletes to perform to older pieces of music — often classical tunes, such as piano concertos. Those pieces were considered part of the public domain, which meant that they could be used or modified freely and without permission.

That changed in 2014, when the ISU lifted its ban on lyrics in the hope of appealing to younger audiences. Suddenly, skaters had the choice of just about any musical genre, from pop to hip-hop to hard rock and even heavy metal.

The problem is that modern music is not part of the public domain, which means athletes must obtain permission to use it. During the 2018 Pyeongchang Games, the first Olympics in which lyrics were allowed, American skaters Alexa Knierim and Brandon Frazier used a cover of “House of the Rising Sun,” and the indie rock band ultimately sued them for using it without its permission."

US figure skater Amber Glenn faces backlash over politics and copyright issues; AP via ABC News, February 9, 2026

 DAVE SKRETTA AP sports writer via ABC News; US figure skater Amber Glenn faces backlash over politics and copyright issues

"On the same day Amber Glenn won Olympic gold as part of the team event, and stepped away from social media due to backlash over her comments on politics and the LGBTQ+ community, the American figure skater ended up with another headache.

Canadian artist Seb McKinnon, who produces music under the name CLANN, took to social media late Sunday to object to the use of his song “The Return,” which Glenn had used in her free skate — and has been using for the past two years without issue.

“So just found out an Olympic figure skater used one of my songs without permission for their routine. It aired all over the world ... what? Is that usual practice for the Olympics?” McKinnon posted to X, shortly after the team competition had ended.

Figure skaters are required to obtain permission for the music they use, but that process is hardly straightforward.

Sometimes the label or record producer owns the copyright, other times the artist themselves, and often there are multiple parties involved. Skaters sometimes will piece together different cuts of music, too. Throw in third-party companies such as ClicknClear that try to smooth out the permission process, and the entire copyright issue becomes murky and nuanced."

Students Are Finding New Ways to Cheat on the SAT; The New York Times, January 28, 2026

 Stephanie Saul, The New York Times; Students Are Finding New Ways to Cheat on the SAT

Sites in China are selling test questions, and online forums offer software that can bypass test protections, according to tutors and testing experts raising alarms.

"Three years ago, after nearly a century of testing on paper, the College Board rolled out a new digital SAT.

Students who had long relied on No. 2 pencils to take the exam would instead use their laptops. One advantage, the College Board said, was a reduced chance of cheating, in part because delivering the test online meant the questions would vary for each student.

Now, however, worries are growing that the College Board’s security isn’t fail safe. Fueling the concerns are what appear to be copies of recently administered digital SAT questions that have been posted on the internet — on social media sites as well as websites primarily housed in China...

Test questions also have been sold on Telegram, a Dubai-based platform, and posted on Scribd, a subscription digital repository of data. Students have also circulated questions among themselves on Google docs, the European tutor said. Many of the tests have been removed from Scribd, apparently at the College Board’s request. A spokesman for Scribd, based in San Francisco, said the company responds to valid requests to remove copyrighted material.

But the College Board has been unable to fight bluebook.plus, according to an email exchange with the College Board that the tutor shared."

How researchers got AI to quote copyrighted books word for word; Le Monde, January 24, 2026

 Nicolas Six , Le Monde; How researchers got AI to quote copyrighted books word for word

"Where does artificial intelligence acquire its knowledge? From an enormous trove of texts used for training. These typically include vast numbers of articles from Wikipedia, but also a wide range of other writings, such as the massive Books3 dataset, which aggregates nearly 200,000 books without the authors' permission. Some proponents of conversational AI present these training datasets as a form of "universal knowledge" that transcends copyright law, adding that, protected or not, AIs do not memorize these works verbatim and only store fragmented information.

This argument has been challenged by a series of studies, the latest of which, published in early January by researchers at Stanford University and Yale University, is particularly revealing. Ahmed Ahmed and his coauthors managed to prompt four mainstream AI programs, disconnected from the internet to ensure no new information was retrieved, to recite entire pages from books."

Copyright laws need to modernize to include fan-made edits; The Miami Hurricane, January 14, 2026

 Marissa Levinson, The Miami Hurricane; Copyright laws need to modernize to include fan-made edits

[Kip Currier: Unfortunately, this University of Miami's student newspaper's Op-Ed -- Copyright laws need to modernize to include fan-made edits -- contains staggeringly inaccurate interpretations and assertions about copyright law and fair use. 

No one wanting to make informed decisions on copyright-related matters should rely on the writer's cherry-picked aspects of copyright law that are then stitched together to make wildly erroneous conclusions.

Copyright literacy is essential.]

 

[Excerpt]

"I can’t even count the amount of times I’ve been scrolling through my saved folders on TikTok, Instagram or X to watch video edits of clips from my favorite TV shows, only to find nothing but a shell of what once used to be there, with a body of text over it. It reads: “This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim.” 

Video edits of shows and movies, which are often paired with trending songs as the audios, have gained traction on social media platforms among hundreds of fan bases. Navigating this new age of fan-generated edits comes with confusion. As copyright laws based on precedent aren’t current enough to guide regulations on this new type of content, video edits deserve to be protected under copyright law.

Are edits legal?

Fan-made video edits range from less than 30-seconds to a few minutes long. This poses the question of whether they are legal in terms of copyright. The law gives copyright the “power ‘to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Investors the exclusive Right to their Respective Writings and Discoveries,’” according to Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. 

This means, under the Copyright Act of 1976, “original works of authorship fixed in tangible medium of expression” are protected. According to the four exemptions of the copyright law, video edits are protected by the first amendment and therefore, should be legal to publish."

Supreme Court to Hear Copyright Battle Over Online Music Piracy; The New York Times, December 1, 2025

 Ann E. Marimow , The New York Times; Supreme Court to Hear Copyright Battle Over Online Music Piracy

"The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Monday in a closely watched copyright clash testing whether internet providers can be held liable for the piracy of thousands of songs online.

Leading music labels and publishers who represent artists ranging from Bob Dylan to Beyoncé sued Cox Communications in 2018, saying it had failed to terminate the internet connections of subscribers who had been repeatedly flagged for illegally downloading and distributing copyrighted music.

At issue is whether providers like Cox can be held legally responsible and be required to pay steep damages — a billion dollars or more — if it knows that customers are pirating the music but does not take sufficient steps to terminate their internet access."

Contributory Copyright Liability Back Before the Supreme Court; Marquette University Law School, November 28, 2025

 Bruce E. Boyden, Marquette University Law School ; Contributory Copyright Liability Back Before the Supreme Court

"The case itself is no trifling matter. Cox, a cable company that provides broadband internet access to its subscribers, is appealing a $1 billion jury verdict holding it liable for assisting some of those subscribers in engaging in copyright infringement. The case arose from an effort by record labels and music publishers to stem the tide of peer-to-peer filesharing of music files by sending notices of infringement to access providers such as Cox. The DMCA bars liability for access providers as long as they reasonably implemented a repeat infringer policy. But who’s a repeat infringer? The notices were an effort to get access providers to take action by giving them the knowledge of repeat infringements necessary to trigger the policies.

According to the evidence presented at trial, however, Cox was extremely resistant to receiving or taking action in response to the notices. The most colorful bit of evidence (and yet another example of how loose emails sink ships) was from the head of the Cox abuse and safety team in charge of enforcing user policies, who screamed in a team-wide email: “F the dmca!!!” (This was followed by an email from a higher-level executive on the chain: “Sorry to be Paranoid Panda here, but please stop sending out e-mails saying F the law….”) The Fourth Circuit ultimately held that because Cox didn’t reasonably implement its repeat infringer policy, it lost its statutory immunity, and then at trial the jury found Cox contributorily liable for the infringements that it had been notified about, which the Fourth Circuit affirmed.

The question before the Court is whether the lower courts applied the right test for contributory copyright liability, or applied it correctly. (There’s a second question, about the standard for willfulness in determining damages, but I didn’t address that one.) There’s a couple of things that make this issue difficult to disentangle; one has to do with the history of contributory infringement doctrine, and the other is a technical issue about what, exactly, is being challenged on appeal."

$1 billion Supreme Court music piracy case could affect internet users; USA TODAY, November 30, 2025

 Maureen Groppe , USA TODAY; $1 billion Supreme Court music piracy case could affect internet users

"The entertainment industry’s seemingly losing battle to stop music from being illegally copied and shared in the digital age hits the Supreme Court on Dec. 1 in a case both sides say could have huge consequences for both the industry and internet users.

A decision by the high court that fails to hold internet service providers accountable for piracy on their networks would “spell disaster for the music community,” according to groups representing musicians and other entertainers.

But Cox Communications, the largest private broadband company in America, argues too tough a standard could “jeopardize internet access for all Americans.”"

The Supreme Court Is About to Hear a Case That Could Rewrite Internet Access; Slate, November 28, 2025

 MICHAEL P. GOODYEAR, Slate; The Supreme Court Is About to Hear a Case That Could Rewrite Internet Access

"Imagine losing internet access because someone in your household downloaded pirated music. We rely on the internet to learn, discover job opportunities, navigate across cities and the countryside, shop for the latest trends, file our taxes, and much more. Now all of that could be gone in an instant.

That is not a dystopian fantasy, but a real possibility raised by a case the Supreme Court will hear on Monday. In Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment, the justices will decide whether an internet provider can be held responsible for failing to terminate subscribers accused of repeat copyright infringements. The ruling could determine whether access to the internet—today’s lifeline for education, work, and civic life—can be taken away as punishment for digital misdeeds. Cox’s indifference to repeat infringement is condemnable, but a sweeping ruling could harshly punish thousands for one company’s bad faith."

‘Progressive’ Tech Group Asks Trump to Block AI Copyright Cases; The American Prospect, October 31, 2025

 DAVID DAYEN, The American Prospect; ‘Progressive’ Tech Group Asks Trump to Block AI Copyright Cases

"The Chamber of Progress, a self-styled “progressive” industry trade group supported by most of the biggest tech platforms, has urged the Trump administration to intervene in a litany of copyright cases involving artificial intelligence firms, to try to stop authors and publishers from having their work used for training AI models without permission.

The pleading comes as Anthropic prepares to pay authors $1.5 billion, the largest award in the history of copyright law, for pirating their work, in a settlement announced last month. OpenAI, Microsoft, Google, and Meta are named defendants in the more than 50 active lawsuits over AI intellectual-property theft.

In a letter to Michael Kratsios, the lead science adviser to President Trump, the Chamber of Progress estimates that AI companies could be liable under the Copyright Act for up to $1.5 trillion for stealing copyrighted work on which to train their models. The letter’s authors claim that this represents “an existential risk” to AI companies, and that the cases should be tossed out under a “fair use” standard.

The Chamber of Progress’s campaign to promote fair use, which they have created a campaign around called “Generate and Create,” comes as at least three of the nonprofit organization’s past or current backers are being sued over copyright claims: Meta, Google, and the AI art generator Midjourney. Another current funder, Nvidia, relies heavily on AI development for its continued success, and venture capital firm a16z, with several AI startups in its portfolio, also funds the nonprofit."

Gotta Deport ‘Em All? How Should Nintendo Respond To Immigrant-Hunting Social Media Post From DHS?; Above The Law, September 24, 2025

 Steven Chung , Above The Law; Gotta Deport ‘Em All? How Should Nintendo Respond To Immigrant-Hunting Social Media Post From DHS?

"Last Monday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) posted a one-minute video on X (formerly Twitter) and other social media platforms, splicing together clips from the Pokémon anime intro with footage of border patrol agents arresting individuals, all set to the first season’s theme song.

The post’s caption was the famous tagline “Gotta Catch ‘Em All!” At the video’s end, it displayed Pokémon cards featuring photos of convicted criminals facing potential deportation...

Reactions were sharply divided: some users found it hilarious and praised its creativity, while others condemned it as dehumanizing and inappropriate, especially for using a children’s franchise to promote immigration enforcement.

Commenters from both sides speculated on how Nintendo would respond, given the company’s reputation for aggressively enforcing its intellectual property rights — evidenced by actions like issuing DMCA takedowns against over 8,500 GitHub repositories for the Yuzu emulator in 2024 and targeting hundreds of fan games on platforms like Game Jolt in multiple waves since 2016. As of now, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company have not issued any public statement on the matter, despite requests for comment from media outlets. However, Nintendo has at least three viable options."