The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Protection of press publishers in the age of generative AI in search of legal remedies to adapt to the pace of technology
Abstract
Has everything already been said on the protection of press publishers? Surely not, and this is due to the new challenges for the press sector posed by Generative AI. This paper aims to discuss the solutions adopted in EU copyright law to safeguard the legal situation of press publishers in the face of the development of Generative AI. It identifies the shortcomings in existing forms of protection and proposes legal remedies for those shortcomings. It offers a fresh perspective on and insights into the new challenges posed by Generative AI, especially regarding its training phase. It explores the approach taken by EU legislation, and also makes reference to solutions proposed in the United States. The objective of this paper is to strike a balance between the need to ensure proper conditions for innovation and the need to protect human creativity and the dissemination thereof. It seeks to contribute to the ongoing debate on copyright and AI by assessing how the current copyright framework suits the development of Generative AI, identifying gaps in protection and paving the way for necessary legal changes in a context of transparency, compensation for use of protected content for AI training purposes, and preservation of rights.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Moreover, they complained of not having access to efficient technical tools to oppose the use of their materials by AI (Kowala, 2024).”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Kowala, 2024
In the citing paper
“Indeed, the press sector is especially important for GenAI training, since it possesses valuable assets: a large amount of text data and ethical principles for aligning the systems to humans' needs (Kowala, 2024).”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Kowala, 2024
In the citing paper
“It should be noted, however, that increasing the cost or difficulty of accessing data may diminish AI technological progress (Kowala, 2024;Manteghi, 2024).”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Kowala, 2024
In the citing paper
“In the same year, in a dispute before the French Competition Authority, French press publishers alleged that they were very often unable to verify whether their press publications had been used by Google's AI Gemini for training purposes.”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Kowala, 2024
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, they complained about the lack of a technical solution for differentiating between the instructions for indexing a web page in Google Search and for using the scraped page in Google's GenAI system.”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Kowala, 2024
10 more claims about this paper
Create a free account to see every claim other papers make about this one.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Derclaye E (2009) Intellectual property rights and human rights: coinciding and cooperating. In: Torremans PLC (ed) Information law series. Kluwer Law International, Intellectual Property and Human Rights, enhanced edition of Copyright and Human Rights
- Jütte BJ (2016) The beginning of a (happy?) relationship: copyright and freedom of expression in Europe. Eur Intellect Prop Rev 38(1):11–22
- Kretschmer M et al (2024) Copyright law and the lifecycle of machine learning models. IIC 55:110–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01419-3 · DOI
- Margoni T, Kretschmer M (2022) A deeper look into the EU text and data mining exceptions: harmonisation, data ownership, and the future of technology. GRUR Int. 71(8):685–710 · DOI
- Mezei P (2024) A saviour or a dead end? Reservation of rights in the age of generative AI, available at SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4695119. Accessed 18 Apr 2024 · DOI
- Quintais JP (2023) Generative AI, copyright and the AI Act. Kluwer Copyright Blog. https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2023/05/09/generative-ai-copyright-and-the-ai-act/. Accessed 22 Apr 2024 · DOI
- Synodinou TE (2019) Lawfulness for users in European copyright law acquis and perspectives. JIPITEC 10(20):20–37 https://www.jipitec.eu/archive/issues/jipitec-10-1-2019/4876/JIPITEC_10_1_2019_20_Synodinou Accessed 19 July 2024
- Vesala J (2022) Press publishers’ right and artificial intelligence. https://lacris.ulapland.fi/ws/portalfiles/portal/21750671/vesala_press_publishers_right_and_ai_2021_01_14.pdf. Accessed 22 Apr 2024 · DOI
Cited by
Arnaudo, A., Coppola, R., Morisio, M., Vetrò, A., Borghi, M., Raso, R., & Khan, B. (2026) · PeerJ Computer Science · doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.3928 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Kowala, M.
- ORCID
- Kowala, Michalina
- Venue
- IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law
- Published
- 2024-08-27
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1604-1623
- ISSN
- 0018-9855
- 2195-0237
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Protection of press publishers in the age of generative AI in search of legal remedies to adapt to the pace of technology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s40319-024-01515-y
- The paper
- Kowala, M. (2024). Protection of press publishers in the age of generative AI in search of legal remedies to adapt to the pace of technology. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-024-01515-y
