Tag Archives: Company Legal & Law Matters

Senators tell ByteDance to shut down Seedance 2.0 AI video app ‘immediately’

Posted on by

After ByteDance suspended the global rollout of its new Seedance 2.0 AI video generator on the weekend, US senators have now told the company to "immediately shut down" the app. "Seedance 2.0 poses a direct threat to the American intellectual property system and, more broadly, to the constitutional rights and economic livelihoods of our creative community," Senators Marsha Blackburn and Peter Welch wrote in a letter to the company. 

The letter reflects an increasing worry in government about AI companies training their apps on copyrighted materials from artists, actors and filmmakers without permission. "Responsible global companies follow the law and respect core economic rights, including intellectual property and personal likeness protections," the senators wrote. They cited Seedance AI examples including an AI generated Thanos and Superman battle, a rewritten Stranger Things ending and that famous (fake) Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt battle. 

After pulling Seedance 2.0, ByteDance said on the weekend that it "respects intellectual property rights" and that it is "taking steps to strengthen current safeguards as we work to prevent the unauthorized use of intellectual property and likeness by users." 

However, Blackburn and Welch called that pledge "a delay tactic to continue to abuse the innovators and profit from their success," adding that its regard for American IP is "part of a larger trend of artificial intelligence companies stealing protected work at the expensive of the creative community." 

Filmmakers have also taken action against Seedance 2.0, including the Motion Picture Association with recently sent a cease-and-desist letter to ByteDance. Yesterday, senators including Blackburn and Welch unveiled a partisan bill to help artists protect their IP by allowing them to access training records used for AI models, among other measures.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/senators-tell-bytedance-to-shut-down-seedance-20-ai-video-app-immediately-112146241.html?src=rss

Judge rules that Krafton must rehire fired Subnautica director

Posted on by

A judge has ruled that publisher Krafton must reinstate Ted Gill as CEO of Unknown Worlds Entertainment, according to a report by Bloomberg. The company fired Gill and two other co-founders last year as part of a shakeup involving the long-anticipated sequel Subnautica 2.

The Delaware judge said Krafton had violated the terms of its contract with Unknown Worlds when it fired the executives. "To remedy these breaches, Gill is reinstated as CEO of Unknown Worlds with full operational authority over the studio," wrote judge Lori W. Will.

A Krafton spokesperson said in a statement that "we respectfully disagree with today's ruling" and that "we are evaluating our options as we determine our path forward." Further litigation over potential damages is still pending.

This legal battle has been brewing for a while. Krafton bought Unknown Worlds back in 2021 and the contract stipulated that executives and staff would get to share in a $250 million bonus if they hit certain revenue targets by 2025. Those targets were not reached, and could not be reached, because Krafton delayed Subnautica 2.

According to the pre-trial brief, Krafton CEO Changham Kim allegedly nixed the payout because it would be a "professional embarrassment" and make him look like a "pushover." He reportedly consulted ChatGPT to ask about ways to avoid paying the bonus and, oddly, seemed to consider a hostile takeover by a newly-formed entity.

Judge Will dinged the CEO on both counts, saying that Kim regretted committing to the payout and "consulted an artificial intelligence chatbot to contrive a corporate 'takeover' strategy." Engadget reached out to Krafton and the company re-emphasized it was displeased with the ruling but said that it doesn't resolve the ongoing litigation. 

As for the game, Krafton says Subnautica 2 is coming sooner rather than later. We've heard that one before.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/judge-rules-that-krafton-must-rehire-fired-subnautica-director-184702823.html?src=rss

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

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. 13 amphitheaters that Live Nation previously had exclusive booking arrangements with will move to an open booking model which will let other promotors book at the venues. The company is also 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.

Update, March 10, 2026, 11:37AM ET: This story was updated to clarify that Live Nation moved to an open booking model with 13 venues that it previously had exclusive booking rights with. Those venues were not owned by Live Nation.

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

Nintendo is suing the US government over Trump’s tariffs

Posted on by

Nintendo of America is suing the US government, including the Department of Treasury, Department of Homeland Security and US Customs and Border Protection, over its tariff policy, Aftermath reports. The video game giant already raised prices on the Nintendo Switch in August 2025 in response to “market conditions,” but has so far left the price of its newer Switch 2 console unchanged.

Nintendo’s lawsuit, filed in the US Court of International Trade, cites a Supreme Court ruling from February that confirmed a lower courts’ opinion that the Trump administration’s global tariffs were illegal. Nintendo’s lawyers claim that the video game company has been “substantially harmed by the unlawful of execution and imposition” of “unauthorized Executive Orders,” and the fees Nintendo has already paid to import products into the country. In response, the company is seeking a “prompt refund, with interest” of the tariffs it has paid.

“We can confirm we filed a request,” Nintendo of America said in a statement. “We have nothing else to share on this topic.”

While taxes and other trade policies are supposed to be set by Congress, President Donald Trump implemented a collection of global tariffs over the course of his first year in office using executive orders and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law that gives the president expanded control over trade during a global emergency. The Trump administration has positioned tariffs as a way to punish enemies and bargain with trade partners, but many companies have passed the increased price of importing goods onto customers.

In upholding opinions from the US District Court of the District of Columbia and the US Court of International Trade, the Supreme Court removed the Trump administration’s ability to collect tariffs using IEEPA, but didn’t clarify how the tariffs the government had illegally collected should be returned to companies. Like Nintendo, other companies have decided filing a lawsuit is the best way to get refunded.

The Guardian reports that US Customs and Border Protection is already preparing a system to process refunds for affected companies, but that might not mark the end of Trump’s tariff regime. In a press conference held after the Supreme Court released its decision, the President announced plans to introduce tariffs using other, more constrained methods. Tariffs aren’t the only obstacle Nintendo faces, either. The company could also be forced to raise the price of its consoles in response to the current RAM shortage.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/nintendo/nintendo-is-suing-the-us-government-over-trumps-tariffs-191849003.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

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