When the biotech company Insilico Medicine used its computer models to propose a promising drug for pulmonary fibrosis, it enthusiastically claimed in a press release that the molecule had been "discovered by" its generative AI platform. Insilico leads a pack of companies using AI to rapidly come up with drug ideas humans might never think of, potentially speeding the race to new cures. AI models are now able to generate atomic designs for drugs almost as easily as ChatGPT can write a thank-you note. However, when it came time to file for an all-important patent to protect that new chemical structure, the company made no mention of AI. Instead the patent names five humans, including CEO Alex Zhavoronkov, as the drug's "inventors."

Japan is considering setting out a nonbinding code for generative artificial intelligence businesses to encourage them to disclose their AI training data and methods for collecting such data to the public. A government panel Tuesday broadly approved a plan to adopt what is known as a "principle code" for generative artificial intelligence businesses to protect intellectual property rights by urging firms to disclose their AI training data and methods for collecting such data to the public. A draft code was presented at an online meeting of an expert panel on intellectual property rights in the AI era. It is based on a law on AI-related technology enacted in May 2025 and seeks to balance rights protection with technological innovation. The government will use a "comply or explain" approach, under which it will set out a nonbinding code for generative AI businesses, including system developers and service providers, allowing them to choose either to comply with the code or publicly explain why they will not comply. Firms that decide to comply with the code will announce their compliance on their websites and notify the government.

Hollywood and ByteDance have seemingly squashed their beef revolving around AI models infringing on studios' intellectual property. The MPA, whose members include Disney, Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery, said that "this agreement represents significant cooperation between the two organizations." The trade association even added that ByteDance's latest release of Seedream 5.0 Pro and Seedance 2.5 reflect its "continued advances in IP protections." According to the press release, this memorandum applies to all AI models from ByteDance, including those used on TikTok, TikTok USDS Joint Venture, CapCut and Dreamina. Shortly after, ByteDance responded by pledging it would strengthen its safeguards around unauthorized use of intellectual property and likeness, even later reportedly suspending Seedance 2.0's global rollout.

It also alleges that Google "downloaded web scrapes of virtually the entire internet, including from known pirate sources and from behind legitimate paywalls". It further alleges that Google copied those works without permission to train its AI models and continues to do so, despite those uses allegedly falling outside the scope of existing agreements. The suit claims the company was fully aware of the legal risks, alleging that internal documents warned using books to train AI models was "highly problematic for Google," and could lead to as much as $100bn in fines. "At no point did Google inform authors and publishers that Google was copying their works as source material to develop and train AI models," the suit alleges. "It's an interesting issue that has a lot of complex dimensions, in no small part because it can be hard to prove what was or wasn't in a training corpus."

It's the latest in a barrage of efforts to win compensation from AI companies over training materials. Hachette Book Group, Cengage Learning and Elsevier are the plaintiff companies and writer Scott Turow is the individual behind this effort . Yet Google has failed to implement effective guardrails. The literary world has made several attempts to make deals with the AI companies that have scraped and trained large language models off of their protected works. In fact, a group including several of the same parties already have a similar class action suit underway against Meta .

Labor MP says'a fair day's pay for a fair day's work' was a founding principle of the ALP as media union calls for tougher new rules on AI use of creative work Husic also urged his colleagues to place stricter rules on the big tech firms or be "doomed to failure". Husic, who has long advocated for a more interventionist approach on AI policy, said big firms like OpenAI and Anthropic should not be left to self-regulate, and that the federal government should be setting strong rules. "If we were to wait for social licence with industry, we wouldn't get emissions reduction. Governments sometimes have to step in," Husic told Sky News on Tuesday. Going down the path of social licence with tech is a path that's sadly doomed to failure, because we tried self-regulation for a couple of decades and found out that it didn't work." The prime minister will deliver a highly anticipated speech in Sydney on Wednesday to address growing concerns around social licence and the necessary policy guardrails for AI, datacentres and Australian intellectual property. We've grown up with the notion of a fair day's pay for a fair day's work - that people should be remunerated fairly for the labour, the effort that they provide. Asked whether he thought his colleagues were doing that, Husic replied: "Obviously, there's a debate that's going on behind the scenes.

Plus: Apple has sued OpenAI for allegedly stealing trade secrets. Ties van der Meer doesn't know how many siblings he has. The 47-year-old was conceived at a private fertility clinic using sperm from an anonymous donor. He eventually tracked down one sibling, but he may have others he'll never find. Other donor-conceived people have found they have tens or even hundreds of them. "It does make you feel a bit mass-produced," said one who discovered they had 25 half-siblings.

When Anna Funder stood before a pack of journalists at Parliament House this month, she presented herself not just as a writer but also a "victim of crime". The Stasiland author was using the analogy to illustrate how technology companies have flagrantly "hoovered up" her literary works for their own profit. Authors, artists, musicians and media organisations were last year assured those laws wouldn't be watered down when the federal government ruled out granting a legal exemption for artificial intelligence companies to mine content to train their large language models, which include ChatGPT, Gemini and Claude. But continual lobbying from tech giants and a whistleblower's tipoff to the independent senator David Pocock have ignited fears that the Albanese government might go back on its word - even as it continues to insist that it won't. The stoush has exposed splits within Labor about how to respond to AI and raised questions about how far the government should bend - if at all - to big tech to capture the supposed riches of the datacentre boom.

Apple has sued OpenAI and two former employees, alleging misappropriation of its trade secrets as the artificial intelligence company seeks to build its own hardware for ChatGPT, a major rupture in a partnership between the iPhone maker and the AI giant. The complaint, filed in a California federal court on Friday, alleges a coordinated effort to steal Apple's confidential information, including product designs, manufacturing processes and supply chain strategies. The lawsuit names Chang Liu, a former senior system electrical engineer, and Tang Yew Tan, a former vice president of product design for the iPhone and Apple Watch, as defendants, along with the OpenAI Foundation, OpenAI Group PBC and io Products. Neither defendant immediately responded to a request for comment. Apple alleged that Liu failed to return a company-issued work laptop and later used an authentication bug to access Apple's internal network, downloading "dozens of Apple's confidential hardware-related files".

Image caption, Apple CEO Tim cook is leaving the role later this year. Apple has accused OpenAI of gaining access to valuable inside information through the hiring of its former employees. In a federal lawsuit filed on Friday, Apple sued the artificial intelligence (AI) company, two of its employees, as well as io Products, claiming it has engaged in a pattern of theft of Apple's confidential product development and related work. At least two long-time Apple workers who left the company to join OpenAI allegedly took part in this pattern by, in part, emailing themselves internal Apple information. Drew Pusateri, a spokesman for OpenAI, told the BBC: We have no interest in other companies' trade secrets.