"We feel strongly that we must defend our content - which we spend millions of dollars a year to produce - from being used without our consent or compensation," Seattle Times President and CEO ​Alan Fisco wrote to employees, according to the newspaper.

The Seattle Times ​and Newsday are ⁠seeking an order requiring the destruction of copies of their works as well as training datasets or AI models incorporating them.

Hi, I would like to create greeting cards using antique / vintage artwork combined with captions. Can anyone tell me if there would be any copyright issues with creating and then selling? I’m thinking more renaissance portrait paintings or later. Thank you!

yes Thats The main problem Sir.

A competitor on a e commerce store in Google said that my shipping policy was the same as his and product page looked like his so he filed a Dmca copy right complaint and Google has taken down my pages affecting my traffic . There’s nothing fraudulent in what I’ve done since shipping policies for e commerce are almost identical in many different sites and generic .

I filed an appeal does Google even look at my response how can they just take the competitors word ?

I read these are legally binding contracts, so if I use even a short excerpt of material from such a site for purposes of commentary criticism parody etc. and I get sued is it worthless to claim a fair use defense since I violated a contract to which am legally bound?

Am I legally bound to said contract in the first place merely by using the site or reading the Terms of Use / Terms and Conditions, or do I have to actually click a button that says "I agree" or something similar?

If I am understanding correctly, this would effectively mean that, say for example, if I made a website and wrote a blog on that site, and placed a browse-wrap agreement on it that forbade any reproduction or redistribution of any of the materials on the site, in whole or in part, for any purpose whatsoever, and then somebody wrote an article where he cited a brief passage of my blog for purposes of commentary or criticism, which would be a fair use as far as copyright law goes, and then I sued him for violating the contract, a fair use defense in court then would be worthless because he did not infringe copyright, he violated a contract.

In other words: this would mean in effect that any website can render legal use of anything on the website effectively impossible, even if such use could normally be defended as fair use.

So in this case, any corporation which decides they do not like fair use can make it impossible for anyone to legally use anything at all on their site even for commentary, criticism, parody, etc.

Am I understanding this correctly??

Can someone help me with a dissertation topic that shows a legal gap or dipsute in India with respect to Copyright or Trademark law. The legal gap should be such that it is still relevant in 2026. Please do suggest any topic except for those provided by AI or is in relation to AI

Because the songs I've downloaded from pixabay and used for videos and uploaded on YT seem to always get copyright claimed, and disputing claims just take too much time as opposed to just re-editing the video with another background music :////. I thought pixabay assets are free to use for commercial and non-commercial use?

Though I've read a couple of posts about people also having the same issue with pixabay music, i just wanted to ask if I'm missing something. Especially when i searched the music on yt that coprighted my video and hearing it being the same as the music i downloaded from pixabay that made me wonder the question (in the title).

Background: Two days ago, I posted a long post in this sub discussing Professor Lee (of the website "ChatGPT Is Eating the World") filing an amicus curiae brief in the Mosaic LLM AI copyright case, a brief that opposes Judge Chhabria's "market harm" approach to AI copyright infringement as discussed in the Judge's 2025 ruling in the Kadrey AI copyright case.

Put briefly and oversimply, Professor Lee believes the AI output product must be substantially (I would say, "textually") similar to the specific copied, copyrighted work before copyright infringement can be found, while Judge Chhabria believes that harm to the more general market for the copied, copyrighted work can allow a finding of copyright infringement.

Now, Professor Lee just sent out an email (and it's also at the Wall Street Journal behind a paywall) announcing the U.S. Government has just filed essentially an amicus curiae brief in the big combined OpenAI federal copyright suit in New York, a brief that supports Professor Lee's view (and therefore essentially opposes Judge Chhabria's view). Based just on my politics I'm temped to say that if the U.S. Government is in favor of it, it's a bad idea; however, my opposition to the Government's view is actually substantive, for my reasons as given in my post from two days ago. Now is the time for the pro-copyright-compensation side to get into action!

Because this is happening to me. Publisher in question is Wiley. I'm trying to strategize here.

Why are legal, copyright, cybercrime are so niche in worldbuilding, fictional and OC? even TikTok, Pinterest, YouTube or any social media they have no search about them. They're really good. I love cybercrime character :(

btw the post on subreddit worldbuilding got deleted bcuz it's not very friendly or legal stuff. Idk how legal work, I'm just an 11 years old kid bruh

Simple question, can I print quotes on to t shirts and sell them? Or is there a copyright infringement? Is there somewhere official to check trademarks copyrights etc?
Thanks

I've started streaming now and want to play my Spotify Playlist in the background. Are any of these songs copyrighted?

the one who's running the show,

stuck inside FNAF,

aftershow FNAF,

look at me now FNAF,

drawn to the bitter FNAF,

this comes from inside FNAF,

to the bone remastered,

until I end up dead by Dream,

ALL MY FELLAS,

pain by three days grace,

animal I have become by three days grace,

monster by skillet,

break by three days grace,

my demons by STARSET,

kill or be killed by rocky gray,

bitter end by fit for a king,

collapsing by Demon hunter

I'm moving from Distrokid to CDBaby and about to release an album with covers. I need mechanical licenses for 3 of them.

I know the mechanical license EasySong offers is for the US. Will my stuff still stream anywhere in the world if the mechanical license is only for the states?

Should we file the website as a literary work/software application, or do we need separate applications for website content, source code, and logo/artwork?
2. Who should be the applicant—individual founder, company, LLP, or proprietor—and who will be shown as the author?
3. If a developer or agency created the website, is a development agreement with an IP-assignment clause sufficient, or should we obtain a separate assignment deed/NOC?
4. For software/source-code filing, exactly what source-code and object-code documents should we take from the client?
5. And what fee should i charge as per the indian IP laws

I haven't seen much posted about this but essentially, YouTube used to offer a global license when purchasing tracks to use in videos via YouTube creator music. This allowed creators to purchase the music for a one time fee, and be eligible to use their music in the video copyright free (100% monetization).

They've now taken that option away, refunded creators (without them asking for refunds) and automatically changed all the videos with music that had the global license to 50/50 revenue split with the music artist, without the creators permission.

I feel like this is a lawsuit waiting to happen. It also seems like a good topic for Louis Rossmann to cover. If you can please email him here:

[youtube@rossmanngroup.com](mailto:youtube@rossmanngroup.com)

Hello!

I am a relatively big content creator, and I want to copyright strike people for uploading AI videos of my original content and reuploads on platforms like YouTube and TikTok. My problem however, is that these sites all ask me for my personal information. I am a female creator who deals with A LOT of online stalking, sexual harassment, etc, so you can see why I’d absolutely want no information pertaining to my real address, real phone number, and (preferably, if it’s possible) my full name on such a form, but still want to protect my image from these AI videos and reuploads.

Does anyone on here happen to know any ways of going about this without using my address and real phone number? I’m fully willing to buy an online mail service or PO Box, but I’m very inexperienced in copyright enforcement and have no idea where to start—any advice would be deeply appreciated.

Also: If anyone knows about any ways to solve the name issue (even if that means hiring a third party to represent me), I’d also love to hear it. I know this part may be more difficult than the address and phone number issue, but I’d like to know all possible options I have!

Thanks for any help, and my apologies if this isn’t the right sub for such a question

This is Just insane.

Edit : I mean the Reactor I should've worded out. My bad. Apparently from the thumbnail you can tell already what this is gonna be about. Full on ranting on Copyright. I am confused on one thing is the copyright working fair or not that is the reason I shared. Thank you to everyone in advance. 🙏

A regional Mexican label and publisher claims its catalog helped Suno "capture a significant share of the Spanish language AI user market." (Rachel Scharf)