Intellectual property rights Archives | Digital Watch Observatory

Human made labels emerge as industries react to AI expansion

Organisations around the world are developing certification labels designed to show that products or creative work were made by humans rather than AI. New badges such as ‘Human made’, ‘AI free’ and ‘Proudly Human’ are appearing across books, films, marketing and websites as industries respond to the rapid spread of AI tools.

At least eight initiatives are now attempting to create a label that could achieve global recognition similar to the Fair Trade mark. Experts warn that competing definitions and inconsistent certification systems could confuse consumers unless a universal standard is agreed upon.

Some schemes allow creators to download AI-free badges with little or no verification, while others use paid auditing processes that rely on analysts and AI detection tools. Researchers note that defining ‘human-made’ is increasingly difficult because AI technologies are embedded in many everyday software tools.

Creative industries are at the centre of the debate as generative AI rapidly produces books, films and music at lower cost and higher speed. Advocates of certification argue that verified human-created content may gain greater value if consumers can clearly distinguish it from AI-generated work.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Writer files lawsuit against Grammarly over AI feature using experts’ identities

A journalist has filed a class action lawsuit against Grammarly after the company introduced an AI feature that generated editorial feedback by imitating well-known writers and public figures without their permission.

The legal complaint was submitted by investigative journalist Julia Angwin, who argued that the tool unlawfully used the identities and reputations of authors and commentators.

The feature, known as ‘Expert Review’, produced automated critiques presented as if they came from figures such as Stephen King, Carl Sagan and technology journalist Kara Swisher.

Such a feature was available to subscribers paying an annual fee and was designed to simulate professional editorial guidance.

Critics quickly questioned both the quality of the generated feedback and the decision to associate the tool with real individuals who had not authorised the use of their names or expertise.

Technology writer Casey Newton tested the system by submitting one of his own articles and receiving automated feedback attributed to an AI version of Swisher. The response appeared generic, casting doubt on the value of linking such commentary to prominent personalities.

Following criticism from writers and researchers, the feature was disabled. Shishir Mehrotra, chief executive of Grammarly’s parent company Superhuman, issued a public apology while defending the broader concept behind the tool.

The lawsuit reflects growing tensions around AI systems that replicate creative styles or professional expertise.

As generative AI technologies expand across writing and publishing industries, questions surrounding consent, intellectual labour and identity rights are becoming increasingly prominent.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Netflix AI filmmaking push grows with InterPositive acquisition

A deal valued at up to $600 million will see Netflix acquire InterPositive, the AI filmmaking company founded by actor and director Ben Affleck, according to people familiar with the matter.

The transaction, paid in cash, is expected to become one of the largest acquisitions made by the streaming company. The final upfront amount is reportedly lower, with additional payments tied to performance targets. Netflix has not publicly disclosed the financial terms of the deal.

The acquisition is intended to accelerate the use of AI in film production. InterPositive has developed software tools that enable filmmakers to modify existing footage, including removing unwanted elements or adjusting scene backgrounds. Director David Fincher has already used the technology in work on an upcoming film starring Brad Pitt.

The deal reflects a broader trend among entertainment companies exploring AI technologies to streamline production and improve efficiency. Companies including Netflix and Amazon are experimenting with AI tools in film and television production, while Disney has established a partnership with OpenAI.

The growing use of AI in Hollywood has raised concerns among industry workers. Some fear the technology could reduce jobs or allow studios to use creative work to train AI systems without compensation.

Affleck has said the InterPositive technology is designed to support filmmakers rather than replace them. The system requires directors first to shoot original footage before the software can train on the material. The tools can then assist with editing tasks, but do not generate films independently.

Netflix has traditionally avoided large-scale acquisitions, focusing instead on developing its technology internally. Even so, the purchase of InterPositive signals a step toward strengthening the company’s AI capabilities in film production.

‘The filmmaking process, really, since its inception, has been one long technological progression,’ Affleck said in a video released by Netflix. ‘We’ve always been seeking to make it feel more realistic, more honest, and InterPositive, I hope, is another iteration or step in keeping with that long and storied history.’

Affleck founded InterPositive with backing from investment firm RedBird Capital Partners and began seeking investment in 2025 before the company attracted interest from Netflix.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EU lawmakers call for stronger copyright safeguards in AI training

The European Parliament has adopted a report urging policymakers to establish a long-term framework protecting copyrighted works used in AI training.

These recommendations aim to ensure that creative industries retain transparency and fair treatment as generative AI technologies expand.

Among the central proposals is the creation of a European register managed by the European Union Intellectual Property Office. The database would list copyrighted works used to train AI systems and identify creators who have chosen to exclude their content from such use.

Lawmakers in the EU are also calling for greater transparency from AI developers, including disclosure of the websites from which training data has been collected. According to the report, failing to meet transparency requirements could raise questions about compliance with existing copyright rules.

The recommendations have received mixed reactions from industry stakeholders.

Organisations representing creators argue that stronger safeguards are necessary to ensure fair remuneration and legal clarity, while technology sector groups caution that additional requirements could create complexity for companies developing AI systems.

The report is not legally binding but signals the political direction of ongoing European discussions on copyright and AI governance.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Writers publish protest book to challenge AI use of copyrighted works

Thousands of writers have joined a symbolic protest against AI companies by publishing a book that contains no traditional content.

The work, titled “Don’t Steal This Book,” lists only the names of roughly 10,000 contributors who oppose the use of their writing to train AI systems without their permission.

An initiative that was organised by composer and campaigner Ed Newton-Rex and distributed during the London Book Fair. Contributors include prominent authors such as Kazuo Ishiguro, Philippa Gregory and Richard Osman, along with thousands of other writers and creative professionals.

Campaigners argue that generative AI systems are trained on vast collections of copyrighted material gathered from the internet without authorisation or compensation.

According to organisers, such practices allow AI tools to compete with the creators whose works were used to develop them.

The protest arrives as the UK Government prepares an economic assessment of potential copyright reforms related to AI. Proposals under discussion include allowing AI developers to use copyrighted material unless rights holders explicitly opt out.

Many writers and artists oppose that approach and demand stronger copyright protections. In parallel, the publishing sector is preparing a licensing initiative through Publishers’ Licensing Services to provide AI developers with legal access to books while ensuring authors receive compensation.

The dispute reflects a growing global debate over how copyright law should apply to generative AI systems that rely on massive datasets to develop chatbots and other digital tools.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

AI deepfakes detection expands on YouTube for politicians and journalists

YouTube is expanding its likeness-detection technology designed to identify AI-generated deepfakes, extending access to a pilot group of government officials, political candidates, and journalists.

The tool allows participants to detect unauthorised AI-generated videos that simulate their faces and request removal if the content violates YouTube policies. The system builds on technology launched last year for around four million creators in the YouTube Partner Program.

Similar to YouTube’s Content ID system, which detects copyrighted material in uploaded videos, the likeness detection feature scans for AI-generated faces created with deepfake tools. Such technologies are increasingly used to spread misinformation or manipulate public perception by making prominent figures appear to say or do things they never did.

According to YouTube, the pilot programme aims to balance free expression with safeguards against AI impersonation, particularly in sensitive civic contexts.

‘This expansion is really about the integrity of the public conversation,’ said Leslie Miller, YouTube’s vice president of Government Affairs and Public Policy. ‘We know that the risks of AI impersonation are particularly high for those in the civic space. But while we are providing this new shield, we’re also being careful about how we use it.’

Removal requests will be assessed individually under YouTube’s privacy policy rules to determine whether the content constitutes parody or political critique, which remain protected forms of expression. Participants must verify their identity by uploading a selfie and a government-issued ID before accessing the tool. Once verified, they can review detected matches and submit removal requests for content they believe violates policy.

YouTube also said it supports the proposed NO FAKES Act in the United States, which aims to regulate the unauthorised use of an individual’s voice or visual likeness in AI-generated media. AI-generated videos on the platform are already labelled, though label placement varies depending on the topic’s sensitivity.

‘There’s a lot of content that’s produced with AI, but that distinction’s actually not material to the content itself,’ said Amjad Hanif, YouTube’s vice president of Creator Products. The company said it plans to expand the technology over time to detect AI-generated voices and other intellectual property.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

EU faces challenges in curbing digital abuse against women

Researchers and policymakers are raising concerns about how new technologies may put women at risk online, despite existing EU rules designed to ensure safer digital spaces.

AI-powered tools and smart devices have been linked to incidents of harassment and the creation of non-consensual sexualised imagery, highlighting gaps in enforcement and compliance.

The European Commission’s Gender Equality 2026–2030 Strategy noted that women are disproportionately targeted by online gender-based violence, including harassment, doxing, and AI-generated deepfakes.

Investigations into tools such as Elon Musk’s Grok AI and Meta’s Ray-Ban smart glasses have drawn attention to how digital platforms and wearable technologies can be misused, even where legal frameworks like the Digital Services Act (DSA) are in place.

Experts emphasise that while the EU’s rules offer a foundation to regulate online content, significant challenges remain. Advocates and lawmakers say enforcement gaps let harmful AI functions like nudification persist.

Commissioners have stressed ongoing cooperation with tech companies and upcoming guidelines to prioritise flagged content from independent organisations to address gender-based cyber violence.

Authorities are also monitoring new technologies closely. In the case of wearable devices, regulators are considering how users and bystanders are informed about recording features.

Ongoing discussions aim to strengthen compliance under existing legislation and ensure that digital spaces become safer and more accountable for all users.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

The EU faces growing AI copyright disputes

Courts across Europe are examining how copyright law applies to AI systems trained on large datasets. Judges in Europe are reviewing whether existing rules allow AI developers to use copyrighted books, music and journalism without permission.

One closely watched dispute in Luxembourg involves a publisher challenging Google over summaries produced by its Gemini chatbot. The case before the EU court in Luxembourg could test how press publishers’ rights apply to AI-generated outputs.

Legal experts warn the ruling in Luxembourg may not resolve wider questions about AI training data. Many disputes in Europe focus on the EU copyright directive and its text and data mining exception.

Additional lawsuits across Europe involving music rights group GEMA and OpenAI are expected to continue for years. Policymakers in Europe are also considering updates to copyright rules as AI technology expands.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

AI copyright warning as 5 major risks outlined in UK Lords report

Concerns about AI copyright are rising after a House of Lords committee report. The report warns that unlicensed use of creative works for AI training threatens the UK’s creative industries.

Large AI systems rely on vast amounts of human-created content, often used without clear consent or compensation. Such developments have intensified debates around AI copyright protections.

The committee argues that the key issues are not the copyright framework itself, but the widespread unlicensed use of protected works and AI developers’ lack of transparency.

The lack of clarity prevents rightsholders from knowing whether their works are being used or from enforcing their rights, raising critical questions about the practical application of AI copyright rules.

The report urges the government to reject the proposed commercial text and data mining exception, introduce stronger protections against unauthorised digital replicas, and safeguard against AI outputs that imitate a creator’s style, voice, or identity.

The committee also calls for legal transparency in AI training data, backing the development of a licensing market, and standards for rights-reservation, data provenance, labelling AI-generated content, and support for UK-governed AI models within a robust AI copyright framework.

Baroness Keeley, committee chair, warned: ‘Our creative industries face a clear and present danger from uncredited and unremunerated use of copyrighted material to train AI models.

Photographers, musicians, authors, and publishers are seeing their work fed into AI models, which then produce imitations that take employment and earning opportunities from original creators.’

Keeley added: ‘AI may contribute to our future economic growth, but the UK creative industries create jobs and economic value now.

In 2023, the creative industries delivered £124 billion of economic value to the UK, and this is set to grow to £141 billion by 2030. Watering down the protections in our existing copyright regime to lure the biggest US tech companies is a race to the bottom that does not serve UK interests. We should not sacrifice our creative industries for the AI jam tomorrow.’

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Japan embraces AI amid cultural unease and labour pressures

When Hayao Miyazaki dismissed early AI-generated animation as ‘an insult to life itself’ in 2016, the technology felt distant from mainstream creative work. Less than a decade later, generative AI tools produce images and text in seconds, reviving debate over authorship, copyright, and artistic identity.

In Japan, debate reflects both anxiety and ambition. Illustrators question the use of their work in training data, while policymakers and corporations see AI as vital to easing a projected labour shortfall by 2040. Legal provisions allowing data use for analysis have intensified calls for safeguards.

Public sentiment in Japan remains broadly favourable toward AI adoption. Surveys indicate relatively high levels of trust, with many viewing AI as part of long-term structural adjustment rather than an immediate threat. Economic expectations often outweigh concerns about disruption.

Workplace implementation, however, remains limited. OECD research shows only a small share of employees actively use AI tools, citing skills shortages and cautious corporate culture. Analysts describe a paradox: AI could ease labour pressures, yet adoption is constrained by limited expertise.

Creative professionals report more immediate effects. Surveys highlight income pressures and uncertainty among illustrators and freelancers. As deployment expands, Japan faces the task of balancing economic necessity with cultural preservation and fair access to emerging technologies.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!