Jim Lee rejects generative AI for DC storytelling, pledging no AI writing, art, or audio under his leadership. He framed AI alongside other overhyped threats, arguing that predictions falter while human craft endures. DC, he said, will keep its focus on creator-led work.
Lee rooted the stance in the value of imperfection and intent. Smudges, rough lines, and hesitation signal authorship, not flaws. Fans, he argued, sense authenticity and recoil from outputs that feel synthetic or aggregated.
Concerns ranged from shrinking attention spans to characters nearing the public domain. The response, Lee said, is better storytelling and world-building. Owning a character differs from understanding one, and DC’s universe supplies the meaning that endures.
Policy meets practice in DCs recent moves against suspected AI art. In 2024, variant covers were pulled after high-profile allegations of AI-generated content. The episode illustrated a willingness to enforce standards rather than just announce them.
Lee positioned 2035 and DC’s centenary as a waypoint, not a finish line. Creative evolution remains essential, but without yielding authorship to algorithms. The pledge: human-made stories, guided by editors and artists, for the next century of DC.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Asia’s creative future takes centre stage at Singapore’s All That Matters, a September forum for sports, tech, marketing, gaming, and music. AI dominated the music track, spanning creation, distribution, and copyright. Session notes signal rapid structural change across the industry.
The web is shifting again as AI reshapes search and discovery. AI-first browsers and assistants challenge incumbents, while Google’s Gemini and Microsoft’s Copilot race on integration. Early builds feel rough, yet momentum points to a new media discovery order.
Consumption defined the last 25 years, moving from CDs to MP3s, piracy, streaming, and even vinyl’s comeback. Creation looks set to define the next decade as generative tools become ubiquitous. Betting against that shift may be comfortable, yet market forces indicate it is inevitable.
Music generators like Suno are advancing fast amid lawsuits and talks with rights holders. Expected label licensing will widen training data and scale models. Outputs should grow more realistic and, crucially, more emotionally engaging.
Simpler interfaces will accelerate adoption. The prevailing design thesis is ‘less UI’: creators state intent and the system orchestrates cloud tools. Some services already turn a hummed idea into an arranged track, foreshadowing release-ready music from plain descriptions.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
A federal jury in Marshall, Texas, USA, has ordered Samsung Electronics to pay $445.5 million to Collision Communications, a New Hampshire-based Company, after finding that Samsung infringed on multiple wireless communication patents.
The lawsuit, filed in 2023, alleged that Samsung’s Galaxy smartphones, laptops, and other wireless products incorporated patented technologies without authorisation. These patents cover innovations in how devices manage and transmit data over 4G, 5G, and Wi-Fi network technologies.
Collision Communications argued that the inventions were originally developed by defense contractor BAE Systems and later licensed to Collision for commercial use. While BAE Systems was not directly involved in the case, its research formed the basis of the patented technologies.
Samsung denied wrongdoing, asserting that the patents were either invalid or not used in the ways described. The company says it plans to appeal the decision.
Would you like to learn more aboutAI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Apple is facing a lawsuit from neuroscientists Susana Martinez-Conde and Stephen Macknik, who allege that Apple used pirated books from ‘shadow libraries’ to train its new AI system, Apple Intelligence.
Filed on 9 October in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, the suit claims Apple accessed thousands of copyrighted works without permission, including the plaintiffs’ own books.
The researchers argue Apple’s market value surged by over $200 billion following the AI’s launch, benefiting from the alleged copyright violations.
This case adds to a growing list of legal actions targeting tech firms accused of using unlicensed content to train AI. Apple previously faced similar lawsuits from authors in September.
While Meta and Anthropic have also faced scrutiny, courts have so far ruled in their favour under the ‘fair use’ doctrine. The case highlights ongoing tensions between copyright law and the data demands of AI development.
Would you like to learn more aboutAI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Tech firms are racing to integrate AI into social media, reshaping online interaction while raising fresh concerns over privacy, misinformation, and copyright. Platforms like OpenAI’s Sora and Meta’s Vibes are at the centre of the push, blending generative AI tools with short-form video features similar to TikTok.
OpenAI’s Sora allows users to create lifelike videos from text prompts, but film studios say copyrighted material is appearing without permission. OpenAI has promised tighter controls and a revenue-sharing model for rights holders, while Meta has introduced invisible watermarks to identify AI content.
Safety concerns are mounting as well. Lawsuits allege that AI chatbots such as Character.AI have contributed to mental health issues among teenagers. OpenAI and Meta have added stronger restrictions for young users, including limits on mature content and tighter communication controls for minors.
Critics question whether users truly want AI-generated content dominating their feeds, describing the influx as overwhelming and confusing. Yet industry analysts say the shift could define the next era of social media, as companies compete to turn AI creativity into engagement and profit.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Musk said Grok will analyse bitstreams for AI signatures and scan the web to verify the origins of videos. Grok added that it will detect subtle AI artefacts in compression and generation patterns that humans cannot see.
AI tools such as Grok Imagine and Sora are reshaping the internet by making realistic video generation accessible to anyone. The rise of deepfakes has alarmed users, who warn that high-quality fake videos could soon be indistinguishable from real footage.
A user on X expressed concern that leaders are not addressing the growing risks. Elon Musk responded, revealing that his AI company xAI is developing Grok’s ability to detect AI-generated videos and trace their origins online.
@grok will be able to analyze the video for AI signatures in the bitstream and then further research the Internet to assess origin
The detection features aim to rebuild trust in digital media as AI-generated content spreads. Commentators have dubbed the flood of such content ‘AI slop’, raising concerns about misinformation and consent.
Concerns about deepfakes have grown since OpenAI launched the Sora app. A surge in deepfake content prompted OpenAI to tighten restrictions on cameo mode, allowing users to opt out of specific scenarios.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
OpenAI has announced it will give copyright holders more control over how their intellectual property is used in videos produced by Sora 2. The shift comes amid criticism over Sora’s ability to generate scenes featuring popular characters and media, sometimes without permission.
At launch, Sora allowed generation under a default policy that required rights holders to opt out if they did not want their content used. That approach drew immediate backlash from studios and creators complaining about unauthorised use of copyrighted characters.
OpenAI now says it will introduce ‘more granular control’ for content owners, letting them set parameters for how their work can appear, or choose complete exclusion. The company has also hinted at monetisation features, such as revenue sharing for approved usage of copyrighted content.
CEO Sam Altman acknowledged that feedback from studios, artists and other stakeholders influenced the change. He emphasised that the new content policy would treat fictional characters more cautiously and make character generation opt-in rather than default.
Still unresolved is how precisely the system will work, especially around the enforcement, blocking, or filtering of unauthorised uses. OpenAI has repeatedly framed the updates as evolutionary, acknowledging that design and policy missteps may occur.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Zelda Williams has urged people to stop sending her AI-generated videos of her late father, Robin Williams, calling the practice disturbing and disrespectful. The actor and director said the videos are exploitative and misrepresent what her father would have wanted.
In her post, she said such recreations are ‘dumb’ and a ‘waste of time and energy’, adding that turning human legacies into digital imitations is ‘gross’. She criticised those using AI to simulate deceased performers for online engagement, describing the results as emotionless and detached.
The discussion intensified after the unveiling of ‘AI actor’ Tilly Norwood, created by Dutch performer Eline Van der Velden. Unions and stars such as Emily Blunt condemned the concept, warning that AI-generated characters risk eroding human creativity and emotional authenticity.
Williams previously supported SAG-AFTRA’s campaign against the misuse of AI in entertainment, calling digital recreations of her father’s voice ‘personally disturbing’. She has continued to call for respect for real artists and their legacies.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The video game company, Nintendo, has denied reports that it lobbied the Japanese government over the use of generative AI. The company issued an official statement on its Japanese X account, clarifying that it has had no contact with authorities.
However, this rumour originated from a post by Satoshi Asano, a member of Japan’s House of Representatives, who suggested that private companies had pressed the government on intellectual property protection concerning AI.
After Nintendo’s statement, Asano retracted his remarks and apologised for spreading misinformation.
Nintendo stressed that it would continue to protect its intellectual property against infringement, whether AI was involved or not. The company reaffirmed its cautious approach toward generative AI in game development, focusing on safeguarding creative rights rather than political lobbying.
The episode underscores the sensitivity around AI in the creative industries of Japan, where concerns about copyright and technological disruption are fuelling debate. Nintendo’s swift clarification signals how seriously it takes misinformation and protects its brand.
Would you like to learn more aboutAI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The Bombay High Court has granted ad-interim relief to Asha Bhosle, barring AI platforms and sellers from cloning her voice or likeness without consent. The 90-year-old playback singer, whose career spans eight decades, approached the court to protect her identity from unauthorised commercial use.
Bhosle filed the suit after discovering platforms offering AI-generated voice clones mimicking her singing. Her plea argued that such misuse damages her reputation and goodwill. Justice Arif S. Doctor found a strong prima facie case and stated that such actions would cause irreparable harm.
The order restrains defendants, including US-based Mayk Inc, from using machine learning, face-morphing, or generative AI to imitate her voice or likeness. Google, also named in the case, has agreed to take down specific URLs identified by Bhosle’s team.
Defendants are required to share subscriber information, IP logs, and payment details to assist in identifying infringers. The court emphasised that cloning the voices of cultural icons risks misleading the public and infringing on individuals’ rights to their identity.
The ruling builds on recent cases in India affirming personality rights and sets an important precedent in the age of generative AI. The matter is scheduled to return to court on 13 October 2025.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
