Google AI chatbot may break press copyright rules: EU legal adviser

IOL (Independent Online)Party-alignedCenterNov 4

An adviser to the European Court of Justice stated that Google's AI chatbot Gemini may violate copyright regulations when it utilizes press publications to generate responses. This marks the first generative AI case to reach the ECJ, initiated by Hungarian publisher Like Company regarding the use of its online articles. While Advocate General Maciej Szpunar confirmed that using such material for model training is generally permitted under text and data mining exceptions, he highlighted a lack of evidence proving Like Company's specific articles were used for this purpose. Instead, Szpunar advised the court to examine whether the chatbot infringes rights by retrieving and reusing publications to create user-facing answers, noting that copyright protects specific expressions rather than mere facts. Google responded by asserting that Gemini creates original outputs based on linguistic patterns and offers publishers the option to opt out of data usage. Although the advocate general's opinion is not legally binding, it is expected to significantly influence the final judgment anticipated within six months.

Bias read (Center): The article maintains neutrality by presenting the legal arguments and potential infringement risks alongside Google's defensive statements and technical clarifications without editorializing.

Daily MaverickIndependentCenterNov 3

An advocate general for the European Court of Justice has issued a non-binding opinion suggesting that Google’s AI chatbot, Gemini, may infringe copyright laws when it generates answers based on press publications. The legal advice distinguishes between using copyrighted material to train large language models, which is generally permitted under text and data mining exceptions, and retrieving specific expressions from articles to provide direct answers to users, which may violate publishers’ rights if paywalls are bypassed or recognizable forms of expression are reused. This case involves a dispute between Google and a Hungarian website operator, highlighting broader industry tensions regarding the economic impact of AI summaries replacing traditional search engine referrals. While Google argues that its system creates original outputs and respects opt-out mechanisms, the European Publishers Council emphasizes the need to differentiate between search indexing and the substitution of original reporting with AI-generated content.

Bias read (Center): The article presents balanced perspectives from both Google and the European Publishers Council while relying on neutral legal terminology and official court proceedings.