Tag Archives: Business

Encyclopedia Britannica sues OpenAI for copyright and trademark infringement

Posted on by

OpenAI has been hit with another lawsuit. This time, Encyclopedia Britannica took legal action against OpenAI, accusing the company of copyright and trademark infringements, as first reported by Reuters. More specifically, Britannica alleged that OpenAI illegally used its "copyrighted content at a massive scale" when training its AI models. Not just with training, the encyclopedia company claimed that ChatGPT's responses to user queries sometimes contain "full or partial verbatim reproductions of [Britannica's] copyright articles."

Along with claims of copyright violations, Britannica argued that OpenAI was also responsible for trademark infringement. According to the lawsuit, ChatGPT generates "made-up content or 'hallucinations' and falsely attributes them" to Encyclopedia Britannica. The lawsuit doesn't specify an amount for monetary damages, but Britannica is also seeking an injunction to prevent OpenAI from repeating these accusations.

When reached out for comment, a spokesperson for OpenAI told Engadget that, "ChatGPT helps enhance human creativity, advance scientific discovery and medical research, and enable hundreds of millions of people to improve their daily lives. Our models empower innovation, and are trained on publicly available data and grounded in fair use."

It's not the first time that Britannica has filed a lawsuit against an AI company. In September, the company, which owns Merriam-Webster, also sued Perplexity for similar reasons. On the other side, OpenAI is still embroiled in a legal battle with The New York Times, which also sued the AI giant for copyright infringement.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/encyclopedia-britannica-sues-openai-for-copyright-and-trademark-infringement-164747991.html?src=rss

Adobe agrees to pay settlement for making its subscriptions hard to cancel

Posted on by

Adobe has agreed to pay the US government $75 million to settle its lawsuit over the company's allegedly harmful approach to subscriptions. The suit started in 2024, when the US Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission filed a joint complaint alleging the company deliberately made it difficult to cancel subscriptions and obscured the frequently expensive "early termination fee" customers have to pay to get out of annual subscriptions that are paid monthly.

"While we disagree with the government’s claims and deny any wrongdoing, we are pleased to resolve this matter," Adobe writes. "We have agreed to provide $75 million worth of free services to customers that qualify. We will proactively reach out to the affected customers once the appropriate filings with the Court are made and accepted. Additionally, we have agreed to a $75 million payment to the Department of Justice."

Adobe's statement also notes that it's made the process of both signing up for and canceling subscriptions "more streamlined and transparent." A major sticking point of the original complaint is that canceling an "annual plan, paid monthly" subscription before completing the first year of service required customers to pay an early termination fee to make up for the value Adobe lost initially offering its software at a discount. Adobe currently allows plans to be refunded if they're canceled within 14 days after signing up, but canceling an "annual plan, paid monthly" subscription after those first 14 days requires paying a hefty fee (as outlined in the company's detailed support page).

A court will have to approve Adobe's proposed settlement before the lawsuit can be totally resolved, but the timing is at least a little ironic. Shantanu Narayen, Adobe's CEO for the last 18 years and the executive who oversaw the company's transition from traditional software business to software-as-a-service business, recently announced plans to retire. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/adobe-agrees-to-pay-settlement-for-making-its-subscriptions-hard-to-cancel-210336635.html?src=rss

Uber robotaxi rides are now available for passengers in Las Vegas

Posted on by

Uber’s and Motional's Hyundai Ioniq 5 autonomous EVs will start appearing as an option for riders in Las Vegas. Passengers requesting for an UberX, Uber Electric, Uber Comfort or Uber Comfort Electric ride may be matched with a Motional robotaxi. They will not be forced to take it, though, and will be notified and given the option to decline and choose a regular ride instead. But if they want to try it, they can boost their chances of getting matched with a robotaxi ride by opting in via the Ride Preferences section under Settings.

Riders who get on autonomous rides will be able to unlock the vehicle through the Uber app. Inside, they’ll hear audio cues reminding them to close the door and fasten their seatbelt. They’ll also be able to access human support through the Uber app in case they need help. The companies started piloting the robotaxi service in Las Vegas in 2022 after establishing a 10-year partnership. Motional’s Hyundai AVs were also tested by Uber Eats for autonomous deliveries in the same year.

The first autonomous rides under the partnership will still have safety drivers behind the wheel to monitor the roads. They will also be only available, for now, at designated locations along Las Vegas Boulevard, “including rideshare zones at the Resorts World Las Vegas and Encore at the Wynn Las Vegas — plus Westgate Las Vegas Resort & Casino and curbside in Downtown Las Vegas and throughout the Town Square shopping district near the airport.” By the end of the year, the companies expect to start offering fully autonomous rides with no human operators. They have plans to expand the rides’ availability throughout the city, as well.

Uber has also just announced that it’s piloting a robotaxi service in Tokyo in late 2026 in partnership with UK self-driving car startup Wayve and Nissan. In addition, the Uber-backed Nuro will test its own autonomous vehicles in the Japanese metropolis soon.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/transportation/uber-robotaxi-rides-are-now-available-for-passengers-in-las-vegas-120030395.html?src=rss

Metadata company Gracenote is the latest to sue OpenAI for copyright infringement

Posted on by

AI companies have been spending a lot of time in court arguing copyright cases over the past year and the latest plaintiff is Gracenote, the metadata company owned by Nielsen. Axios reports that Gracenote is suing OpenAI for the unauthorized and unpaid use of both its metadata and its framework for connecting that information.

Gracenote specializes in entertainment metadata, creating descriptions and identifiers for content that clients such as TV providers use to help their own customers with discovery. Most of the lawsuits against AI businesses have focused on the content used to train LLMs, but the Gracenote case brings an extra layer with the alleged infringement of the structure or sequence for a dataset in addition to the actual data. 

"Defendants could have paid Gracenote to license its valuable Gracenote Data. Or they could have sought to train and ground their models only on information in the public domain. They did neither. Defendants instead improperly copied and used Gracenote Data to create their own commercially valuable AI products, all without paying a dime," the complaint states. The company claims that its previous attempts to work with OpenAI for a licensing agreement were rebuffed or ignored. Gracenote has recently inked deals to back AI ventures from other companies, including Samsung and Google.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/metadata-company-gracenote-is-the-latest-to-sue-openai-for-copyright-infringement-200347812.html?src=rss

Live Nation settlement avoids breakup with Ticketmaster

Posted on by

To keep Ticketmaster, Live Nation is going to have to make some major changes. As first reported by Politico, Live Nation reached a settlement with the Department of Justice in its antitrust case that accused the live entertainment giant of monopolistic practices. Live Nation will reportedly pay at least $200 million in damages to states that were part of the lawsuit filed in May 2024, but avoid selling off Ticketmaster.

Live Nation will also be required to make a few changes to its business practices. According to NBC News, Ticketmaster, a subsidiary of Live Nation, will be required to create a "standalone ticketing system" that allows third-party competitors like SeatGeek and Eventbrite to sell tickets on.

The settlement aims to loosen some of Live Nation's control over venues as well. According to NBC News, the company will have to divest up to 13 amphitheaters and be prohibited from retaliating against venues that choose another ticket seller over Ticketmaster.

The settlement comes less than a week after the case went to trial. While the matter may be concluded with the Justice Department, many of the states' attorneys general who were part of the lawsuit will be continuing their legal action separately.

"The settlement recently announced with the U.S. Department of Justice fails to address the monopoly at the center of this case and would benefit Live Nation at the expense of consumers," New York State Attorney General Letitia James wrote in a press release. "We will continue our lawsuit to protect consumers and restore fair competition to the live entertainment industry." 26 other attorneys general signed onto continuing the lawsuit with James.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/music/live-nation-settlement-avoids-breakup-with-ticketmaster-155031214.html?src=rss

Google reportedly muzzles Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney until 2032

Posted on by

Epic Games’ courtroom battle with Google is over, but it’s reportedly going to affect how its CEO can speak about the tech giant for years for years to come. According to The Verge, part of the settlement terms Epic had signed has a clause stating that Epic and Sweeney will have to speak positively about Google’s competitiveness and app store operations going forward. “Epic believes that the Google and Android platform, with the changes in this term sheet, are procompetitive and a model for app store / platform operations, and will make good faith efforts to advocate for the same,” the clause reportedly reads.

Further, The Verge says the settlement terms between the companies will expire five years after Google is done rolling out changes to its service fees. Since Google expects to finish implementing changes worldwide by September 30, 2027, Sweeney can’t speak negatively about the app store until after September 30, 2032.

Sweeney is one of the most vocal critic of how Apple and Google operate their app stores, which had led to several lawsuits between the companies. He once called both Apple and Google “gangster-style businesses” that will “always continue” to be engaged in illegal practices and just pay the fine afterwards. Epic Games filed a lawsuit against Google in 2020, accusing it of illegal monopoly on app distribution and in-app billing services for Android devices. In 2023, Google lost the lawsuit. It then lost its appeal two years later, before the companies reached a settlement in November 2025. On March 4 this year, Google officially scrapped the 30 percent cut it takes from Play Store transactions, lowering it to 20 percent and even to 15 percent in some cases.

In response to the Google’s decision, Epic Games is bringing back Fortnite to the Play Store worldwide. “Google is opening up Android all the way with robust support for competing stores, competing payments, and a better deal for all developers. So, we've settled all of our disputes worldwide. THANKS GOOGLE!” Sweeney posted on X. Based on the clause in their settlement, future statements from the CEO about Google will need to carry a similar tone, in the next few years at least.

Update, March 5 2026, 2:13PM ET: Epic reached out to Engadget to share an important clarification: “Criticizing Google is fair game on topics not related to app store distribution/ fees,” the company wrote on X, “Epic and Google agreed to not disparage only on topics about the settlement.” We’ve updated the copy of our story to reflect the specificity of the non-disparagement agreement, and look forward to the ways in which Epic will certainly exercise its remaining capacity to be critical of Google.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/google-reportedly-muzzles-epic-games-ceo-tim-sweeney-until-2032-105501644.html?src=rss

Big tech companies agree to not ruin your electric bill with AI data centers

Posted on by

Today the White House announced that several major players in tech and AI have agreed to steps that will keep electricity costs from rising due to data centers. Under this Ratepayer Protection Pledge, companies are agreeing to practices that are intended to protect residents from seeing higher electricity costs as more and more businesses create power-hungry data centers. Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle and xAI have all apparently signed on. A few of the participants — Amazon, Google and Meta — had conveniently timed press releases patting themselves on the back for their participation and touting whatever other policies they have for mitigating the negative impacts of data center construction.

The main provisions of the federal pledge have tech companies agreeing to "build, bring, or buy the new generation resources and electricity needed to satisfy their new energy demands, paying the full cost of those resources." It also claims they will pay for any needed power infrastructure upgrades and operate under separate rate structures for power that will see payments made whether or not the business uses that electricity.

The pledge doesn't appear to be any form of binding agreement and there's no discussion of enforcement or a penalty for companies that don't honor the stipulated provisions. It also doesn't address any of the other impacts data centers and AI development might be having, either on local communities, on other utilities and resources, or on access to critical computing elements like RAM.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/big-tech-companies-agree-to-not-ruin-your-electric-bill-with-ai-data-centers-230102956.html?src=rss

Big tech companies agree to not ruin your electric bill with AI data centers

Posted on by

Today the White House announced that several major players in tech and AI have agreed to steps that will keep electricity costs from rising due to data centers. Under this Ratepayer Protection Pledge, companies are agreeing to practices that are intended to protect residents from seeing higher electricity costs as more and more businesses create power-hungry data centers. Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle and xAI have all apparently signed on. A few of the participants — Amazon, Google and Meta — had conveniently timed press releases patting themselves on the back for their participation and touting whatever other policies they have for mitigating the negative impacts of data center construction.

The main provisions of the federal pledge have tech companies agreeing to "build, bring, or buy the new generation resources and electricity needed to satisfy their new energy demands, paying the full cost of those resources." It also claims they will pay for any needed power infrastructure upgrades and operate under separate rate structures for power that will see payments made whether or not the business uses that electricity.

The pledge doesn't appear to be any form of binding agreement and there's no discussion of enforcement or a penalty for companies that don't honor the stipulated provisions. It also doesn't address any of the other impacts data centers and AI development might be having, either on local communities, on other utilities and resources, or on access to critical computing elements like RAM.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/big-tech-companies-agree-to-not-ruin-your-electric-bill-with-ai-data-centers-230102956.html?src=rss

The Supreme Court doesn’t care if you want to copyright your AI-generated art

Posted on by

As AI-generated artwork becomes more commonplace, it still won't be able to be copyrighted, according to US courts. On Monday, the US Supreme Court declined to hear a case about whether an artwork generated with the help of AI can be copyrighted. The refusal means that a lower court's decision to reject the copyright request will stand.

The case dates back to 2018 when Stephen Thaler applied for a copyright of an artwork called A Recent Entrance to Paradise. Unlike using ChatGPT or Midjourney, Thaler, a computer scientist, created an AI system that generated the artwork in question. However, the US Copyright Office rejected his application in 2022 on the grounds that it wasn't made by a human author. Thaler sought appeals at higher courts, but ultimately had to escalate the case to the Supreme Court after both a federal judge in Washington and the US Court of Appeals ruled against him.

With a refusal from the highest court in the US, it's unlikely Thaler's case can continue. The US Supreme Court could always hear a related case in the future, but Thaler's lawyers said, "even ⁠if it later overturns the Copyright Office’s test in another case, it will be too late," adding that the decision will have negatively impacted the creative industry during "critically important years." It's worth noting that Thaler also filed applications to the US Patent and Trademark Office for AI-generated inventions, which were rejected for similar reasons.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/the-supreme-court-doesnt-care-if-you-want-to-copyright-your-ai-generated-art-171849407.html?src=rss

Sony faces a $2.7 billion antitrust lawsuit in the UK

Posted on by

Another major antitrust lawsuit has launched in the UK. This time its against Sony, which could be on the hook for almost £2 billion ($2.7 billion) for overcharging PlayStation users. 

A class action case for about 12.2 million users argues that Sony "occupies a dominant position in relation to the digital distribution of PlayStation games and in-game content and that it has been unfairly charging its UK customers too much for digital games and in-game content purchased through the PlayStation Store."

It argues that Sony "has a near monopoly" on add-on content and digital games through the PlayStation store, allowing it to set the prices and take a 30 percent commission.

The class action encompasses anyone in the UK who owned a PlayStation console and purchased digital games or made in-game purchases through the PlayStation store between August 19, 2016 and February 12, 2026. It's being run as an opt-out lawsuit, so anyone meeting the criteria can qualify without taking any action. If the lawsuit is successful then each person could receive about £162 ($217). 

Sony has argued that allowing downloads from third-party stores could bring security and privacy risks, according to the Financial Times. It further states that the digital sales commission makes up profits lost for selling their consoles with minimal profit. 

This lawsuit follows the success of a similar class action decided in October. The UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal found that Apple had been abusing its dominant market position and overcharging App Store users. In December, Apple filed an appeal against the £1.5 billion ($2 billion) fine. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/sony-faces-a-27-billion-antitrust-lawsuit-in-the-uk-114113889.html?src=rss