![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/SEI_273028825.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Disney alleged that AI image generator Midjourney was trained on films like The Lion King<\/p>\n
Maximum Film\/Alamy<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The three years since the release of ChatGPT, OpenAI\u2019s generative AI chatbot, have seen huge changes in every part of our lives. But one area that hasn\u2019t changed \u2013 or at least, is still trying to maintain pre-AI norms \u2013 is the upholding of copyright law.<\/p>\n
It is no secret that leading AI firms built their models by hoovering up data<\/a>, including copyrighted material, from the internet without asking for permission first. This year, major copyright holders struck back, buffeting AI companies were with a range of lawsuits alleging copyright infringement.<\/p>\n The most high-profile case was filed by Disney and Universal in June<\/a>, both of whom alleged in a lawsuit that AI image generator Midjourney had been trained on their intellectual property, allowing users to create images that \u201cblatantly incorporate and copy Disney\u2019s and Universal\u2019s famous characters\u201d.<\/p>\n That case is still ongoing, with Midjourney responding<\/a> in August that \u201cthe limited monopoly granted by copyright must give way to fair use\u201d, which would allow AI companies to train their models on copyrighted works because the outcomes are transformative.<\/p>\n Midjourney\u2019s fighting words highlight how the copyright argument isn\u2019t as simple as it may seem at first. \u201cMany people thought that copyright would be the silver bullet that killed AI, but it is not turning out that way,\u201d says Andres Guadamuz<\/a> at the University of Sussex in the UK. Guadamuz says he\u2019s surprised at how little of a dent copyright is making on AI companies\u2019 progress.<\/p>\n That\u2019s despite some governments stepping into the debate. In October, the Japanese government formally asked OpenAI<\/a>, the company behind the Sora 2 AI video generator, to respect the intellectual property rights of its culture, including manga and popular video games such as those published by Nintendo.<\/p>\n Sora 2 has faced further controversy due to its ability to create lifelike footage of real people. OpenAI strengthened limitations on depicting Martin Luther King, Jr. after representatives of his estate complained that the civil rights campaigner was being depicted in pastiches of his famous \u201cI have a dream\u201d speech, including one where he made monkey noises.<\/p>\n \u201cWhile there are strong free speech interests in depicting historical figures, OpenAI believes public figures and their families should ultimately have control over how their likeness is used,\u201d OpenAI said in a statement<\/a>. The climbdown was only partial: celebrities or public figures have to opt out of their images being used in Sora 2, which some still see as overly permissive. \u201cNo one should have to tell OpenAI if they don\u2019t want themselves or their families to be deepfaked,\u201d says Ed Newton-Rex<\/a>, a former AI executive and founder of Fairly Trained, a campaign group.<\/p>\n In some instances, AI companies have faced legal actions for their activities, as seen in one of the biggest putative lawsuits of the past year. In September, three authors alleged that Anthropic \u2013 the company behind the Claude chatbot \u2013 had knowingly downloaded more than seven million pirated books in order to train its AI models.<\/p>\n