OpenAI says the latest version of its text-to-video artificial intelligence (AI) tool Sora was downloaded over a million times in less than five days - hitting the milestone faster than ChatGPT did at launch. The app, which has topped the Apple App Store charts in the US, generates ten second long realistic-looking videos from simple text prompts. The figures were announced in an X post from Sora boss Bill Peebles, who said the surging growth came even though the app was only available to people in North America who had received an invite. The Sora app - which makes it easy for users to post videos they have created to social media - has resulted in a deluge of videos on social feeds. Some have included depictions of deceased celebrities such as musicians Michael Jackson and Tupac Shakur.

The rise of AI-generated music is diluting royalty pools and revealing structural flaws in existing remuneration frameworks, challenging the well-established artist compensation systems in the music industry. Existing compensation solutions, such as piecemeal licensing agreements, lack scalability and technical rigour, while current data attribution mechanisms provide only uncertain estimates and are rarely implemented in practice. This paper introduces a framework for a generative music infrastructure centred on direct attribution, transparent royalty distribution, and granular control for artists and rights' holders. We distinguish ontologically between the training set and the inference set, which allows us to propose two complementary forms of attribution: training-time attribution and inference-time attribution. We here favour inference-time attribution, as it enables direct, verifiable compensation whenever an artist's catalogue is used to condition a generated output. Besides, users benefit from the ability to condition generations on specific songs and receive transparent information about attribution and permitted usage. Our approach offers an ethical and practical solution to the pressing need for robust compensation mechanisms in the era of AI-generated music, ensuring that provenance and fairness are embedded at the core of generative systems.

OpenAI's Sora 2 app allows users to make AI-generated videos based on a text prompt. OpenAI's Sora 2 app allows users to make AI-generated videos based on a text prompt. Company behind the AI video app says it will work with rights holders to'block characters from Sora at their request' Mon 6 Oct 2025 00.10 EDTLast modified on Mon 6 Oct 2025 00.11 EDT Sora 2, a video generator powered by artificial intelligence, was launched last week on an invite-only basis. The app allows users to generate short videos based on a text prompt. Varun Shetty, OpenAI's head of media partnerships, said: "We'll work with rights holders to block characters from Sora at their request and respond to takedown requests."

The complaint, filed in July, alleges Meta has been torrenting and seeding Strike 3's videos since 2018. Associated exhibits and details of the complaint were unsealed last week. Strike 3 alleges Meta's motive was partly to obtain otherwise difficult to scrape visual angles, parts of the human body, and extended, uninterrupted scenes--rare in mainstream movies and TV--to help it create what Mark Zuckerberg calls AI "superintelligence." "They have an interest in getting our content because it can give them a competitive advantage for the quality, fluidity, and humanity of the AI," alleges Christian Waugh, an attorney for Strike 3. This process made Strike 3's porn videos accessible to minors, the complaint alleges, since BitTorrent does not have age verification.

But it's now clear that the case--filed more than two years before the generative AI boom began--was the first strike in a much larger war between content publishers and artificial intelligence companies now unfolding in courts across the country. The outcome could make, break, or reshape the information ecosystem and the entire AI industry--and in doing so, impact just about everyone across the internet. The plaintiffs include individual authors like Sarah Silverman and Ta Nehisi-Coates, visual artists, media companies like The New York Times, and music-industry giants like Universal Music Group. This wide variety of rights holders are alleging that AI companies have used their work to train what are often highly lucrative and powerful AI models in a manner that is tantamount to theft. Nearly every major generative AI company has been pulled into this legal fight, including OpenAI, Meta, Microsoft, Google, Anthropic, and Nvidia.

In a joint statement, bodies representing thousands of creatives dismissed the proposal made by ministers on Tuesday that would allow companies such as Open AI, Google and Meta to train their AI systems on published works unless their owners actively opt out. The coalition includes the British Phonographic Industry, the Independent Society of Musicians, the Motion Picture Association and the Society of Authors as well as Mumsnet, the Guardian, Financial Times, Telegraph, Getty Images, the Daily Mail Group and Newsquest. Their intervention comes a day after the technology and culture minister Chris Bryant told parliament the proposed system, subject to a 10-week consultation, would "improve access to content by AI developers, whilst allowing rights holders to control how their content is used for AI training". The Conservative chair of the Commons culture, media and sport select committee, Caroline Dinenage, alleged the government had "fully drunk the Kool-Aid on AI". But Bryant told MPs: "If we were to adopt a too tight a regime based on proactive, explicit permission, the danger is that international developers would continue to train their models using UK content accessed overseas, but may not be able to deploy them in the UK … this could significantly disadvantage sectors across our economy, including the creative industries, and sweep the rug from underneath British AI developers."

Just like Napster triggered a global, technological shift in the way music is consumed and distributed, we are now on the precipice of another major revolution certain to disrupt the music industry. Artificial intelligence, or "AI" as it is more commonly referred, has quickly emerged as a game changer across a myriad of industries and music is no exception. AI offers the promise of innovative opportunities and avenues for music creation, publishing, recording, synchronization, distribution, consumption and revenue generation. However, these opportunities also present significant, novel challenges for music rights holders and users alike--and the legal challenges have just begun. AI is not a new concept.

Gary Furlong, a Texas-based audiobook narrator, had worried for a while that synthetic voices created by algorithms could steal work from artists like himself. Early this month, he felt his worst fears had been realized. Furlong was among the narrators and authors who became outraged after learning of a clause in contracts between authors and leading audiobook distributor Findaway Voices, which gave Apple the right to "use audiobooks files for machine learning training and models." Findaway was acquired by Spotify last June. Some authors and narrators say they were not clearly informed about the clause and feared it may have allowed their work or voices to contribute to Apple's development of synthetic voices for audiobooks.

There's no reason you should have ever heard of Simon Squibb, the "chief purpose officer of the Purposeful Project". Mr Squibb, who describes himself as an "Elon Musk wanna-be" in his Twitter profile, is one of those tirelessly energetic mid-life influencers who proliferate on the petri dish of LinkedIn. Displaying the sort of enthusiasm that Matt Hancock reserves for a Bushtucker Challenge, Mr Squibb is on a mission. "I want to fix the education system", he says. This fix entails removing something that many of us consider quite an important part of the education system: the learning part.

Drawing on the expertise of rights holders, broadcasters and technology providers from across the sports ecosystem, SportsPro's latest Insider Series event returned to the theme of over-the-top (OTT) and broadcast, providing a wealth of insight into the technology that the industry is tapping into to put live sports on our screens. With much to unpack, SportsPro writers select five key takeaways from across the two days, covering piracy, machine learning and remote production. Cameron Andrews, BeIN Media Group's legal director for anti-piracy, said sports rights holders "were slow" to react to the incursion of BeoutQ, but described the Saudi bootlegging operation as "a very good case study" for piracy "and the impact it can have". "I think some rights owners are certainly aware of that and are very engaged," he said. "But unfortunately I think a lot of other rights owners are still quite some way behind." The emergence of BeoutQ has shone a light on the threat piracy poses to the sports industry, and Andrews called on rights owners, such as leagues and governing bodies, to come together to tackle the issue.