Tag Archives: Business

AI startup argues scraping every song on the internet is ‘fair use’

Posted on by

When most tech companies are challenged with a lawsuit, the expected defense is to deny wrongdoing. To give a reasonable explanation of why the business' actions were not breaking any laws. Music AI startups Udio and Suno have gone for a different approach: admit to doing exactly what you were sued for.

Udio and Suno were sued in June, with music labels Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group and Sony Music Group claiming they trained their AI models by scraping copyrighted materials from the Internet. In a court filing today, Suno acknowledged that its neural networks do in fact scrape copyrighted material: "It is no secret that the tens of millions of recordings that Suno’s model was trained on presumably included recordings whose rights are owned by the Plaintiffs in this case." And that's because its training data "includes essentially all music files of reasonable quality that are accessible on the open internet," which likely include millions of illegal copies of songs. 

But the company is taking the line that its scraping falls under the umbrella of fair use. "It is fair use under copyright law to make a copy of a protected work as part of a back-end technological process, invisible to the public, in the service of creating an ultimately non-infringing new product," the statement reads. Its argument seems to be that since the AI-generated tracks it creates don't include samples, illegally obtaining all of those tracks to train the AI model isn't a problem.

Calling the defendants' actions "evading and misleading," the RIAA, which initiated the lawsuit, had an unsurprisingly harsh response to the filing. "Their industrial scale infringement does not qualify as ‘fair use’. There’s nothing fair about stealing an artist’s life’s work, extracting its core value, and repackaging it to compete directly with the originals," a spokesperson for the organization said. "Defendants had a ready lawful path to bring their products and tools to the market – obtain consent before using their work, as many of their competitors already have. That unfair competition is directly at issue in these cases."

Whatever the next phase of this litigation entails, prepare your popcorn. It should be wild.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/ai-startup-argues-scraping-every-song-on-the-internet-is-fair-use-233132459.html?src=rss

The Republican National Committee loses its legal challenge to Gmail

Posted on by

A federal judge dismissed a case brought by the Republican National Committee (RNC) against Google over its Gmail service. The suit alleged that Google’s email platform labeled GOP fundraising emails as spam at a higher rate than those from the other side of the aisle.

District Court Judge Daniel Calabretta from the Eastern California District Court dismissed the case with prejudice, preventing the Republican party from bringing its case against Google back to court. The dismissal with prejudice means it cannot bring the case to another court but can still file an appeal to Calabretta’s decision, according to The Verge.

Calabretta wrote in his dismissal order that the RNC failed to state a claim under “any legislative policy” or prove there was “sufficient harm to users of Gmail.”

“The RNC has not shown Google’s alleged conduct has violated any other law, which is a necessary element of intentional interference with economic relations,” Calabretta wrote in his dismissal order. “Accordingly, the court grants Google’s motion to dismiss, this time with prejudice.” Calabretta had previously dismissed the case without prejudice.

Thursday’s ruling marks the second case that the RNC has lost over allegations of unfair filtering by Gmail. The RNC filed a lawsuit in the same court in 2022 seeking damages from Google for “donations it allegedly lost as a result” of labeling fundraising emails as spam. Calabretta called the lawsuit a “close case” but ultimately ruled that the RNC “failed to plausibly allege its claims” that Google’s spam filtering was committed in bad faith, according to court filings.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/the-republican-national-committee-loses-its-legal-challenge-to-gmail-184122392.html?src=rss

The Republican National Committee loses its legal challenge to Gmail

Posted on by

A federal judge dismissed a case brought by the Republican National Committee (RNC) against Google over its Gmail service. The suit alleged that Google’s email platform labeled GOP fundraising emails as spam at a higher rate than those from the other side of the aisle.

District Court Judge Daniel Calabretta from the Eastern California District Court dismissed the case with prejudice, preventing the Republican party from bringing its case against Google back to court. The dismissal with prejudice means it cannot bring the case to another court but can still file an appeal to Calabretta’s decision, according to The Verge.

Calabretta wrote in his dismissal order that the RNC failed to state a claim under “any legislative policy” or prove there was “sufficient harm to users of Gmail.”

“The RNC has not shown Google’s alleged conduct has violated any other law, which is a necessary element of intentional interference with economic relations,” Calabretta wrote in his dismissal order. “Accordingly, the court grants Google’s motion to dismiss, this time with prejudice.” Calabretta had previously dismissed the case without prejudice.

Thursday’s ruling marks the second case that the RNC has lost over allegations of unfair filtering by Gmail. The RNC filed a lawsuit in the same court in 2022 seeking damages from Google for “donations it allegedly lost as a result” of labeling fundraising emails as spam. Calabretta called the lawsuit a “close case” but ultimately ruled that the RNC “failed to plausibly allege its claims” that Google’s spam filtering was committed in bad faith, according to court filings.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/the-republican-national-committee-loses-its-legal-challenge-to-gmail-184122392.html?src=rss

Don Lemon is suing Elon Musk and X

Posted on by

When Don Lemon's "premium" video hosting deal on X was canceled in March, a representative for the former CNN anchor threatened legal action. Nearly five months later, he's taking Musk and his platform to court, claiming he hasn't been paid.

The former CNN anchor filed a lawsuit on Thursday against Musk and X, the New York Times reports. The suit pertains to an alleged payment agreement Lemon says Musk refuses to honor. Lemon filed his case in California Superior Court in San Francisco.

Lemon claims that he agreed to produce a news and interview show on the X platform back in January. Lemon would receive $1.5 million a year and part of the advertising revenue for producing premium content for X. However, Lemon states in the filing that he never signed a contract because Musk told him he didn’t need to “fill out paperwork” and that he’d back his show regardless of his views or interview topics.

Lemon kicked off his first episode by interviewing Musk, asking questions about Musk’s alleged ketamine use, his views on transgender individuals and his stance on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) hiring initiatives. Lemon also interrogated Musk for tweets which appeared to support the racist belief known as the “great replacement theory.” Hours after the interview, Musk texted Lemon to tell him their deal was done.

X chief executive officer Linda Yaccarino says the company was focused on becoming a “video first” platform and inked similar deals with famous names like former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, former Democratic lawmaker Tulsi Gabbard and sports commentator Jim Rome. Many of these shows have yet to materialize on X.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/don-lemon-is-suing-elon-musk-and-x-171526672.html?src=rss

Don Lemon is suing Elon Musk and X

Posted on by

When Don Lemon's "premium" video hosting deal on X was canceled in March, a representative for the former CNN anchor threatened legal action. Nearly five months later, he's taking Musk and his platform to court, claiming he hasn't been paid.

The former CNN anchor filed a lawsuit on Thursday against Musk and X, the New York Times reports. The suit pertains to an alleged payment agreement Lemon says Musk refuses to honor. Lemon filed his case in California Superior Court in San Francisco.

Lemon claims that he agreed to produce a news and interview show on the X platform back in January. Lemon would receive $1.5 million a year and part of the advertising revenue for producing premium content for X. However, Lemon states in the filing that he never signed a contract because Musk told him he didn’t need to “fill out paperwork” and that he’d back his show regardless of his views or interview topics.

Lemon kicked off his first episode by interviewing Musk, asking questions about Musk’s alleged ketamine use, his views on transgender individuals and his stance on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) hiring initiatives. Lemon also interrogated Musk for tweets which appeared to support the racist belief known as the “great replacement theory.” Hours after the interview, Musk texted Lemon to tell him their deal was done.

X chief executive officer Linda Yaccarino says the company was focused on becoming a “video first” platform and inked similar deals with famous names like former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, former Democratic lawmaker Tulsi Gabbard and sports commentator Jim Rome. Many of these shows have yet to materialize on X.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/don-lemon-is-suing-elon-musk-and-x-171526672.html?src=rss

Meta will pay $1.4 billion to Texas, settling biometric data collection suit

Posted on by

Meta has agreed to pay $1.4 billion to the state of Texas in order to resolve a lawsuit that accused the company of illegally using facial recognition technology. The suit alleges that Meta used this tech to collect the biometric data of millions of Texans without consent. The agreement marks the largest financial settlement ever paid out to a single state.

The lawsuit was originally filed in 2022 and was the first big case brought under the state’s Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier Act, which was put into place back in 2009. A provision of this law mandates up to $25,000 per violation and Texas accused Meta of violating the statute “billions of times” via photos and videos that users uploaded to Facebook that were tagged without consent. 

Additionally, the original suit could have led to an additional $10,000 per alleged violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. In other words, Meta just saved itself a bunch of money, considering the sheer number of alleged violations and a maximum financial penalty of $35,000 each.

A spokesperson for Meta told Reuters that it’s happy the matter is settled and that the company is "exploring future opportunities to deepen our business investments in Texas, including potentially developing data centers.” The company, however, continues to deny any wrongdoing, though it has shut down its automated facial recognition system.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is taking something of a victory lap, declaring in an official statement that the state is fully committed to “standing up to the world’s biggest technology companies and holding them accountable for breaking the law and violating” privacy rights. Texas and Meta reached this settlement just weeks before a court trial was set to begin.

“Facebook will no longer take advantage of people and their children with the intent to turn a profit at the expense of one’s safety and well-being,” Paxton said when the suit was originally filed. “This is yet another example of Big Tech’s deceitful business practices and it must stop.”

This isn’t the first time Meta has had to issue a large payout to a state regarding the alleged collection of biometric data. The company agreed to pay Illinois $650 million back in 2020 to settle a similar class action suit. That suit alleged that the company had violated a privacy law that requires companies to get explicit consent before collecting biometric data from users. Once again, Meta denied any wrongdoing.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/meta-will-pay-14-billion-to-texas-settling-biometric-data-collection-suit-165451338.html?src=rss

Apple has reached a contract agreement with unionized US retail employees for the first time

Posted on by

Apple and the unionized employees at its Towson, Maryland retail store have reached a tentative agreement that could secure them better pay, job protections, scheduling improvements to support a work-life balance and a more transparent disciplinary process. The Towson location in 2022 became the first Apple Store in the country to unionize, and back in May, it voted to authorize a strike against the company after “unsatisfactory” negotiation outcomes.

The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers’ Coalition of Organized Retail Employees (IAM CORE) said it’s been negotiating with Apple since January 2023. Under the tentative three-year agreement they’ve now reached, workers would be given average raises of 10 percent over the life of the contract, and starting pay rates for most positions would go up. The agreement would also establish a severance clause. The union represents about 85 employees, who will get to vote on the agreement on August 6.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apple-has-reached-a-union-contract-with-us-retail-employees-for-the-first-time-212422613.html?src=rss

Apple has reached a contract agreement with unionized US retail employees for the first time

Posted on by

Apple and the unionized employees at its Towson, Maryland retail store have reached a tentative agreement that could secure them better pay, job protections, scheduling improvements to support a work-life balance and a more transparent disciplinary process. The Towson location in 2022 became the first Apple Store in the country to unionize, and back in May, it voted to authorize a strike against the company after “unsatisfactory” negotiation outcomes.

The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers’ Coalition of Organized Retail Employees (IAM CORE) said it’s been negotiating with Apple since January 2023. Under the tentative three-year agreement they’ve now reached, workers would be given average raises of 10 percent over the life of the contract, and starting pay rates for most positions would go up. The agreement would also establish a severance clause. The union represents about 85 employees, who will get to vote on the agreement on August 6.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apple-has-reached-a-union-contract-with-us-retail-employees-for-the-first-time-212422613.html?src=rss

Video game performers will strike over AI concerns

Posted on by

The SAG-AFTRA union today called for a strike against several major video game publishers after failing to reach an accord over AI use. The action will take effect at 12:01 am on July 26.

"We're not going to consent to a contract that allows companies to abuse A.I. to the detriment of our members," SAG-AFTRA President Fran Drescher said."Enough is enough. When these companies get serious about offering an agreement our members can live – and work – with, we will be here, ready to negotiate."

SAG-AFTRA performers working in games "deserve and demand the same fundamental protections as performers in film, television, streaming, and music: fair compensation and the right of informed consent for the A.I. use of their faces, voices, and bodies," said the union's National Executive Director & Chief Negotiator Duncan Crabtree-Ireland.

The union has been lobbying the video game industry to agree to protections against its members' likenesses and voices being recreated with AI. SAG-AFTRA entered negotiations with the companies for the Interactive Media Agreement in October 2022. Other studios, such as Replica Games, have agreed to the union's contract. The union also secured a similar deal for animated TV shows earlier this year.

A spokesperson for the gaming companies included in the Interactive Media Agreement, Audrey Cooling, provided a statement on behalf of the businesses. ​​“We are disappointed the union has chosen to walk away when we are so close to a deal, and we remain prepared to resume negotiations," she said. "We have already found common ground on 24 out of 25 proposals, including historic wage increases and additional safety provisions. Our offer is directly responsive to SAG-AFTRA’s concerns and extends meaningful AI protections that include requiring consent and fair compensation to all performers working under the IMA. These terms are among the strongest in the entertainment industry."

The strike includes the following studios:

  • Activision Productions Inc.

  • Blindlight LLC

  • Disney Character Voices Inc.

  • Electronic Arts Productions Inc.

  • Formosa Interactive LLC

  • Insomniac Games Inc.

  • Llama Productions LLC

  • Take 2 Productions Inc.

  • VoiceWorks Productions Inc.

  • WB Games Inc.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/video-game-performers-will-strike-over-ai-concerns-201733660.html?src=rss

US and European antitrust regulators agree to do their jobs when it comes to AI

Posted on by

Regulators in the US and Europe have laid out the "shared principles" they plan to adhere to in order to "protect competition and consumers" when it comes to artificial intelligence. "Guided by our respective laws, we will work to ensure effective competition and the fair and honest treatment of consumers and businesses," the Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, European Commission and the UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said.

"Technological inflection points can introduce new means of competing, catalyzing opportunity, innovation and growth," the agencies said in a joint statement. "Accordingly, we must work to ensure the public reaps the full benefits of these moments."

The regulators pinpointed fair dealing (i.e. making sure major players in the sector avoid exclusionary tactics), interoperability and choice as the three principles for protecting competition in the AI space. They based these factors on their experience working in related markets.

The agencies also laid out some potential risks to competition, such as deals between major players in the market. They said that while arrangements between companies in the sector (which are already widespread) may not impact competition in some cases, in others "these partnerships and investments could be used by major firms to undermine or co opt competitive threats and steer market outcomes in their favor at the expense of the public."

Other risks to competition flagged in the statement include the entrenching or extension of market power in AI-related markets as well as the "concentrated control of key inputs." The agencies define the latter as a small number of companies potentially having an outsized influence over the AI space due to the control and supply of "specialized chips, substantial compute, data at scale and specialist technical expertise."

In addition, the CMA, DOJ and FTC say they'll be on the lookout for threats that AI might pose to consumers. The statement notes that it's important for consumers to be kept in the loop about how AI factors into the products and services they buy or use. "Firms that deceptively or unfairly use consumer data to train their models can undermine people’s privacy, security, and autonomy," the statement reads. "Firms that use business customers’ data to train their models could also expose competitively sensitive information."

These are all fairly generalized statements about the agencies' common approach to fostering competition in the AI space, but given that they all operate under different laws, it would be difficult for the statement to go into the specifics of how they'll regulate. At the very least, the statement should serve as a reminder to companies working in the generative AI space that regulators are keeping a close eye on things, even amid rapidly accelerating advancements in the sector.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/us-and-european-antitrust-regulators-agree-to-do-their-jobs-when-it-comes-to-ai-163820780.html?src=rss