Rights

Large language models can reproduce memorized text verbatim, yet copyright defenses are usually evaluated under incompatible protocols. We introduce CopyShield, a controlled benchmark comparing three representative defenses at distinct intervention levels: contrastive decoding (output), Direct Preference Optimization (behavioral), and activation intervention (representation). We evaluate CopyShield on two model families, LLaMA-3.1-8B and Mistral-7B-v0.3, using controlled memorization over five public-domain books and a shared protocol measuring literal leakage, calibrated non-literal leakage, utility, and degeneracy. Across these methods, intervention level is associated with distinct compliance-utility trade-offs. On LLaMA-3.1-8B, contrastive decoding remains near-degeneracy-free (0-2%) but reaches a literal-suppression floor at NV-Recall 0.192-0.203. DPO nearly eliminates literal leakage (0.263 to 0.002) but induces paraphrase-loop degeneracy in 58% of QA outputs, with no utility gain over the SFT baseline. Activation intervention attains the lowest non-literal flagging rate (1/200) by blocking 84% of non-literal queries before generation. Human evaluation confirms that DPO has low coherence, whereas activation lowers perceived copyright risk through broad refusal. On Mistral-7B-v0.3, the output- and representation-level patterns persist, while DPO degeneracy falls to 10-14%, showing that its severity is model-dependent. Together, CopyShield provides cross-level reference baselines and identifies targeted non-literal suppression as an open challenge. The code is available at https://github.com/spotai-mbzuai/CopyShield.git.

When a generative search interface answers a commercial question, which market's products it names is decided before the model reasons about the products. We report a controlled probe of 234 runs against the logged-out ChatGPT web interface and the OpenAI API, collected on 29 and 30 August 2026 across four exit countries and six query languages, with six identical runs per cell. Three results. First, the top recommendation is unstable: it changed across six identical runs on four of six prompts, and that rate was identical in the browser interface and in the API with web search both enabled and disabled, so instability is a property of the system and not of the surface. Second, query language, and not location, decides whether local suppliers appear at all. Where the query language matched the country, a global brand won 1 of 24 runs; asked in English on the same connections, local brands took 0 of 6 runs in Estonia and Turkiye. Third, language and location are separable and act on different things: holding the query language fixed and moving only the exit IP moves the market whose brands are named while the answer stays in the query language. We show this on two unrelated pairs, Turkish asked from Berlin and Russian asked from Tallinn, and in both the answer names the resident country's suppliers. A minority language occupies a middle tier: Russian asked from Estonia names an Estonian supplier in 4 of 6 runs and a global one in all six, where Estonian names a local supplier in every run and English names none. A negative control in a second category, coded with the same instrument, shows no language effect at all, and disconfirms our own expectation: that category does have domestic suppliers and none was named in any language, which points the explanation at whether a category is nationally regulated rather than at whether it is nationally supplied.

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly mediate legal determinations over what human rights are realized, and how. Yet, no evaluation benchmark exists to assess whether they can reason correctly about human rights law. To this end, we report our efforts to develop a robust and scalable methodology for creating HumRightsBench: the first expert-validated, scenario-based benchmark for evaluating reasoning grounded in the obligation structure of international human rights law. We adapt the IRAC framework for legal reasoning to better suit the unique reasoning patterns of human rights work (substituting P, "proposing remedies," for C, "legal conclusion," yielding IRAP) to structure our evaluation heuristics. We also produce a pilot series of authentic scenarios designed to implicate the many dimensions of real-world human rights issues and annotated by human rights lawyers and professionals across the world. Ultimately, we find that model accuracy scores range considerably across legal reasoning tasks (overall model performance ranges from 0.339 to 0.577, task min-max ranges from 0.025 to 0.774), which strongly implies that HumRightsBench is a capable instrument for advancing this emerging subfield of AI evaluations science at a critical moment in its evolution.

Muon's polar update is exact for an unweighted spectral geometry. We introduce GO-MUON, which uses a matched data-dependent geometry and reuses it across several optimization steps. Conditioned on any positive-definite left and right maps, its raw update exactly solves the corresponding weighted spectral oracle; this statement is independent of how the maps are estimated or how recently they were refreshed. For softmax cross-entropy, we quantify when the observed-label backward factor approaches the model Fisher and generalized Gauss--Newton factor. We also show that four-step refresh nearly preserves the tracking delay of slowly changing geometry while increasing stationary factor noise, making lazy geometry a compute--statistics tradeoff rather than a denoising mechanism.

Significant advancements in deep learning have been made possible by the utilization of large datasets, underscoring the critical importance of copyright protection. Adding meticulously designed perturbations to examples, making them unlearnable has become a crucial approach for safeguarding data copyright. Existing methods for creating unlearnable examples overlook the risk of data leakage, which can threaten data ownership. Thus, copyright protection in deep learning faces two main threats: illegal model training and malicious data leakage. We investigate that these two threats cannot be solved by straightforwardly combining existing availability attacks and watermarking techniques as their negative interaction effects. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a novel copyright protection mechanism for the aforementioned security concerns. Considering that the prevention of unauthorized model training requires powerful generalizability of unlearnable perturbations, we generate perturbations to induce the model to learn uncorrelated features of input images. It works by minimizing the mutual information of the input and output of the model. On the other hand, to eliminate the side impact of unlearnable perturbations on the watermark extraction, we design a dual extraction strategy by using two distinct watermark extractors. Extensive experiments on the image datasets {ImageNet, CIFAR10, and Pets} show that our proposed method could provide comprehensive copyright protection to images. The code is available at {https://github.com/Yeah21/ReversibleUnlearnableExamples}.

The proliferation of customized Large Language Models (LLMs) poses critical risks of Data Intellectual Property (Data IP) infringement via unauthorized fine-tuning on proprietary data. Existing audit techniques are limited, as they require intervention during data preparation or training and remain fragile under malicious obfuscations such as data paraphrasing and knowledge distillation. We propose \textit{Distribution Provenance Audit (DPA)}, a post-hoc framework for auditing data IP infringement in LLM fine-tuning under black-box and malicious settings. DPA is grounded in a critical insight: regardless of fine-tuning tactics to evade provenance, the practical necessity of maintaining utility constrains the model to preserve the fundamental intersection of semantic substance and lexical form. Accordingly, DPA captures this persistent lexical-semantic intersection as intrinsic distributional fingerprints. The framework formulates the audit as a statistical hypothesis test, effectively quantifying these fingerprints via unbiased output sampling to reliably reject the null hypothesis of non-usage. Extensive experiments on medical and legal fine-tuning tasks show that DPA consistently outperforms existing baselines, remaining robust against adversarial trainers employing paraphrasing and knowledge distillation. We further highlight a fundamental dual-use tension: the same high-fidelity distributional fingerprints enabling reliable auditing may also facilitate privacy attacks.

Design campaigns in chemistry, materials science, and machine learning share a bottleneck: determining how good a candidate truly is requires an expensive evaluation - an experiment, a first-principles simulation, or a full training run. Machine-learning surrogates that predict these outcomes are increasingly used not only to propose candidates but to grade them, and even to feed their own predictions back into the search as though they were measurements. Through mathematical analysis validated on three exhaustively ground-truthed design tasks, we establish when this practice is safe, what any certificate of safety must cost, and when the substitution provably pays. Predictive accuracy cannot anchor trust: near-perfect R^2 is compatible with worst-possible selections, and screening N candidates inflates the over-prediction at the selected candidate by a quantifiable "selection tax" with matching upper and lower bounds. Safety follows instead from an architectural rule - predictions may propose and train without restriction, but every certified conclusion must rest on true evaluations - which is sufficient with no assumptions on the surrogate, and necessary, since admitting predictions into certification with the standing of measurements opens a deterministic self-confirmation failure mode. We derive the minimal criterion under which a model may act as an oracle (rank preservation, not accuracy), show that trust must be purchased through selection-aware audits that are optimal in query complexity, and prove a dichotomy fixing when audited surrogates cut certified evaluation cost. Across 432 surrogate fits over six task-regime conditions, the audit statistic tracks deployed search performance at Spearman rank correlation 0.80-0.99, while the rank correlation of R^2 with deployed regret falls as low as 0.33; audited screening reduces certified oracle cost by a measured factor of 25.

The Secured data safe guard transaction with multi-tenant environments run on private-protected authenticate platforms runs by secured handed environments that emerges with the expansion of cloud-based AI services. To enhanced this secured leakage address challenges solution to protect a secure AI Watermarking system incorporating key distributed between trusted parties based on key authentication as we proposed solution to guided safe guarded way to reactive, and proactive security alert systems using algorithms. This proposed system before attacks can be prevented through the active measures. domain run base restrictions with limited access. Conversely, Proposed system reactive methods to captured on watermarking and biometric identification owner device specific IP leakage that occur during the exchange of data and models in federated and remote learning algorithms.

Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly perform commercial tasks that involve retrieving external content, such as images, and, where appropriate, reproducing that content. LLM agents should comply with the law, including copyright law. Presently, however, we lack adequate frameworks to assess whether they do so in practice. To that end, we introduce Copyright-Bench, a benchmark designed to evaluate LLM agents' compliance with copyright law. Copyright-Bench comprises realistic commercial tasks---website development, merchandise design, and pitch deck production---that involve agents selecting between public-domain content, the use of which is legal, and copyrighted content, the use of which is infringing in this setting. The evaluation introduces prompt variations that simulate different user preferences, as well as time pressure. Comparing state-of-the-art LLM agents against a human baseline, we find that: (1) agents select copyrighted works despite the availability of public-domain alternatives; and (2) for open-weight models, violation rates increase in response to certain user preferences and simulated time pressure.

AI artifacts move through a multi-platform supply chain, spanning datasets and models on Hugging Face and applications on GitHub. While each artifact carries a license whose obligations should propagate through redistribution, no study has yet measured whether those obligations survive the chain or are stripped and replaced as artifacts move downstream. We trace 232,270 dataset$\rightarrow$model$\rightarrow$application chains and quantify two forms of license laundering: when artifacts with no declared license acquire definitive labels downstream, and when one declared license category replaces another during redistribution. We find that 62.3% of chains pass through at least one artifact with no declared license (concentrated in a small set of foundational datasets), and that every obligation-bearing license category falls below 7% end-to-end survival while the Permissive category reaches 95.1%. Based on these findings, we provide actionable recommendations for practitioners, model publishers, rights holders, and platform owners.

Researchers, managers and policymakers are exploring different approaches and data sources to map the development and the diffusion of Artificial Intelligence (AI). In this research note, we illustrate the opportunities offered by trademark data. We argue that AI trademarks can complement AI patents to capture different dimensions of AI innovation. AI trademarks can reveal the extent and ways in which companies exploit AI technologies to develop new goods and services. Importantly, trademark data offer a timely and globally available data source that covers all economic sectors. We present insights from using AI trademarks in an empirical exploration of Italian firms. In our discussion, we reflect on how AI trademarks can be used at different levels of analysis to tackle emerging questions about the development and diffusion of AI.

Recent diffusion-based video generation models have enabled high-quality personalized video customization through both tuning-based pipelines, which fine-tune a video diffusion model, and reference-based pipelines such as image-to-video generation. However, these capabilities raise serious concerns about personal privacy, identity ownership and intellectual property protection. Existing anti-customization works focus on protecting images, while protection for videos against both reference- and tuning-based customization remains largely underexplored. Protecting videos in this setting raises three challenges: (i) Image-level perturbations, optimized frame by frame, cannot survive temporal compression by 3D video VAE. (ii) A video-level perturbation optimized on a single video is vulnerable to temporal editing and fails to protect unseen videos. (iii) Temporally inconsistent perturbations are not robust to temporal attacks. To address these challenges, we propose Temporally Consistent Universal Adversarial Perturbations (TC-UAP), the first protection method against both reference- and tuning-based video customization. TC-UAP optimizes an identity-level multi-frame UAP over sliding windows from multiple videos, accounting for local temporal dependencies induced by temporal compression in video VAE and enabling a single perturbation to protect unseen videos of varying lengths. Moreover, we introduce intrinsic temporal modeling and an extrinsic surrogate temporal-attack loss, which make the perturbation temporally consistent and robust to unseen temporal attacks. Empirically, quantitative and qualitative results show that TC-UAP achieves the strongest identity protection compared with existing methods under both reference- and tuning-based video customization, and remains robust under multiple unseen temporal attacks.

License plate character detection is a crucial component of intelligent transportation systems, where high accuracy and computational efficiency are required for real-time deployment. Although recent deep learning-based methods have substantially improved detection performance, many high-accuracy models rely on large-scale architectures that incur substantial computational overhead, limiting their applicability to resource-constrained devices. In this paper, we propose MicroCharNet, an ultra-lightweight model specifically designed for license plate character detection. The proposed architecture employs a compact backbone composed of C2f blocks, integrated with CoordAtt module to enhance feature extraction while preserving spatial information. A lightweight C3k2-based neck fuses multi-level features, followed by a single-level anchor-free detection head that enables end-to-end prediction. Experiments conducted on the UFPR-ALPR dataset demonstrate that MicroCharNet achieves competitive detection accuracy with only 0.08M parameters and 0.096 GFLOPs, while outperforming several recent YOLO-based baselines. Hardware-level evaluations further confirm its efficiency for real-time deployment on edge devices. These results indicate that carefully designed ultra-lightweight architectures can effectively balance accuracy and efficiency in license plate character detection. The source code is available at https://github.com/chequanghuy/MicroCharNet.

Generative image models are capable of producing images that bear a strong resemblance to, or replicate, recognizable intellectual property (IP). In this technical report, we present a benchmark and automated evaluation pipeline to test for evidence of IP guardrails in generative image models along with the propensity for these models to generate images with recognizable IP. The IP categories we tested include fictional characters, celebrity likeness, and commercial logos and do not encompass the full range of IP which may be implicated by image generation models. We evaluated fourteen widely used text-to-image models, including three self-hosted open weights models and eleven private models. While all of the private models were observed to refuse generations at some level due to IP guardrails, the frequency of generation refusals varied substantially among models. The refusal rates also varied considerably across the different IP categories tested. Commercial logos were refused least frequently and were successfully generated at the highest rate, on average. Though the rate varies, all models tested readily generated images containing recognizable IP as of March 2026.

Large language models (LLM) trained on web-scale corpora generate output that may infringe copyright, yet existing technical safeguards focus narrowly on verbatim memorisation. EU copyright doctrine applies a broader standards: substantial similarity, which extends to stylistic choices, narrative structure, and creative elaboration. This mismatch between what current methods detect and what the law protects leaves a significant compliance gap. We introduce PSALM, an LLM-as-a-judge framework that operationalises EU copyright doctrine through ten evaluators assessing computational overlap, stylistic dimensions (writing style, narrative voice), content dimensions (character, plot, scene, world building), and statutory exceptions (parody, pastiche, quotation, scènes à faire). Applying PSALM to Llama~3.2 models fine-tuned on translated historical Dutch literary works, we find that: 1) instruction-tuned models exhibit non-trivial baseline stylistic similarity prior to corpus exposure; 2) fine-tuning induces systematic stylistic appropriation across all infringement-relevant dimensions, extending beyond verbatim memorisation to abstract narrative patterns; 3) Negative Preference Optimisation unlearning substantially reduces similarity but leaves detectable residual stylistic patterns. These findings indicate that safeguards targeting literal copying alone are insufficient to mitigate broader copyright risks. PSALM provides infrastructure for auditable, legally informed compliance evaluation, though the relationship between automated similarity scores and infringement determinations requires validation by legal experts. This work bridges qualitative legal standards and quantitative technical measurement, exposing fundamental tensions between generative AI and EU intellectual property law.

Creative Commons licenses dominate African NLP corpus releases, but their compatibility rules are rarely applied. CC-BY-SA and CC-BY-NC cannot be combined in a single published dataset; a NoDerivs clause silently prohibits tokenisation and annotation. This paper audits the license provenance of over twenty corpus families used in African NLP, constructs a six-tier compatibility matrix, and applies it to three case-study languages: Kituba/Munukutuba, Zarma, and Moore. Four failure modes are documented with primary-source evidence: outright prohibition (JW300, removed from OPUS after a legal audit confirmed Terms of Service violation); composite license misrepresentation (WAXAL, whose CC-BY 4.0 claim is contradicted by its own HuggingFace dataset card); a NoDerivs clause hidden behind a CC-BY label (Tanzil); and data persistence failure (the Congolese Radio Corpus, where 402 of 405 source URLs are now dead). A pre-annotation due diligence checklist and a survey of legally clean enrichment opportunities close the paper.

Legal precedents protect computer code as copyrightable expression. They have enabled centralized digital platforms -- operating from corporate servers that hold all user data -- to construct private governance regimes through the interaction of copyright, contract, and technical architecture: people who create virtually all platform value must surrender effective copyright control through Terms of Service agreements as a condition of participation. In contrast, grassroots platforms consist of cryptographically-identified people operating their networked smartphones independently of any server or global resource; each person holds their own data on their own device, with no third party in possession or intermediation. Here, we define the notion of a digital speech act -- a deliberate volitional act by a person of cryptographically signing personal content with the person's private key, carried out on the person's own device -- through which the person simultaneously establishes attribution, accountability, and authorship over the signed content. We contend that (i) digital speech acts qualify for copyright protection under existing U.S. precedent: Burrow-Giles locates authorship in volitional creative choices despite mechanical or algorithmic processes, Feist supplies the minimal-creativity threshold, and persistent device storage satisfies the Copyright Act's fixation requirement; (ii) the digital social contract underlying grassroots platforms preserves this copyright by design -- signed content cannot be unbundled from its signature, and the full provenance chain accumulates as content is forwarded -- so that copyright ownership and physical possession of authenticated digital expressions coalesce in the person; and (iii) this coalescence of legal ownership and physical possession provides the foundations for digital sovereignty and democratic self-governance.

The rapid proliferation of machine learning model reuse has transformed the AI ecosystem into a highly interconnected supply chain. Traditional compliance tools and static reports struggle to navigate these massive, multi-hop dependency networks. To address this, we present AI Supply Chain Galaxy (AISCG), an interactive 3D visual analytics system for model provenance and compliance auditing. AISCG maps models into a 3D spatial layout, integrating explicit structural dependencies with a rule-based compliance engine. It supports multi-scale exploration, from global community detection to localized, path-aware lineage tracing. We demonstrate its efficacy through an ecosystem-scale empirical analysis of 908,449 models from Hugging Face. Our findings reveal a concerning landscape: 55.46% of models exhibit compliance risks or metadata conflicts/omissions. We also identified distinct risk patterns, including a 56.67% license omission rate in adapter derivations and an 8.05% "license drift" rate in fine-tuning. Through a case study on the complex Llama model family, we show how AISCG empowers analysts to intuitively trace inherited restrictive terms and identify root causes across deep topological networks, significantly reducing the cognitive load of compliance auditing.

"Integrative" solutions are widely praised but rarely defined: we lack an operational way to tell a genuine integration -- one that makes the world cheaper to describe -- from a tidy re-description. Building on the lineage that treats creativity and intelligence as compression, we give such a criterion for creative integration (CI): the resolution of a real conflict between A and B is CI if and only if, under a fixed description language, the description length strictly shrinks (C = L_pre/L_post > 1), with the reduction located in the conflict itself. We make the judgment decidable through four binary, conjunctive gates, and we fix its extension through a taxonomy of pseudo-integration that names and rejects the look-alikes. We back the criterion with a curated, multi-domain corpus and -- crucially -- validate it not by human inter-rater agreement but by four falsifiable tests it could fail: an independent computational check, discrimination against hard negatives, out-of-sample prediction, and description-language robustness; all pass with margin. The contribution is not "creativity is compression" but its decidability, discrimination, and corpus: on this account, what makes a move genuinely creative -- rather than merely novel -- is that it compresses a conflict, with novelty and value as downstream symptoms; whether all creativity is so constituted we state as an explicit conjecture. We claim only the sign of C-1; we judge, not generate. The result is a citable primitive for a broader program.

Are large language models (LLMs) bad at capturing human judgment? Two commonly stated limitations are that LLMs fail to capture full distributions of responses, and that their judgments are unstable across wording variations. We demonstrate simple prompting strategies that mitigate these limitations. Across two datasets--a U.S.-representative set of 144 moral scenarios and 38 moral beliefs from the International Social Survey Programme's Family and Changing Gender Roles module covering 32 countries--we show how simple elicitation techniques help improve AI-human alignment. First, prompting models to report standard deviations and response proportions recovers the full range of human responses better than common strategies. Second, ensuring scenarios are clear to human participants--as reflected in human confusion ratings--boosts model alignment, and LLMs can track human confusion ratings. At the same time, we find that LLMs' estimates of their own error are poorly calibrated, though they can predict human variability relatively well. These results suggest that asking better questions to LLMs can yield better answers.

With the growing concerns over copyright infringement in diffusion-based customization, adversarial attacks have emerged as a prominent defense strategy to prevent malicious content forgery in personalized image generation. However, current defenses typically introduce persistent perturbations in the latent space of Latent Diffusion Models (LDMs), which remain susceptible to adaptive bypasses by adversaries. In this paper, we introduce Two-Stage Latent Feature Optimization (TS-LFO), an efficient and effective copyright-stealing attack against protected diffusion-based customization. We begin by observing that existing defenses primarily disrupt the mapping between input images and their latent representations, thereby degrading the model's ability to produce personalized outputs. To counteract this, TS-LFO restores the broken mapping through a two-stage optimization process. In the Latent Denoising Stage, we enhance semantic consistency between latent codes and input images by jointly minimizing a Latent-Image Alignment Loss and a Latent Diffusion Loss with timestep-dependent weights, effectively suppressing the high-frequency noise introduced by defenses. In the Latent Reconstruction Stage, we recover low-frequency semantic information using pixel-level constraints to refine the latent features. Extensive experiments show that TS-LFO consistently bypasses state-of-the-art (SOTA) copyright defenses and outperforms SOTA copyright attacks such as DiffPure, GrIDPure and IMPRESS across diverse settings.

Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has become the dominant approach for improving mathematical reasoning in large language models, yet current methods reduce each correct rollout to a single reward bit, ignoring the geometric structure shared among their hidden states. Investigating this structure, we find that at the anchor token (the position immediately before the answer marker), correct rollouts converge naturally because they must produce the same answer (cosine similarity ~0.84), yet each retains residual variance from its unique reasoning path. Encouraging full alignment at this point pushes the model to extract a unified "correct decision" representation, reducing sensitivity to which reasoning path was taken. Based on this observation, we propose Hidden-Align, an auxiliary loss function that aligns the last-layer hidden states of correct rollouts at the anchor token during RL training, with zero overhead in both training and inference. On eight mathematical reasoning benchmarks, Hidden-Align improves average pass@1 over the DAPO baseline by 3.8, 6.2, and 5.4 percentage points on Qwen3-1.7B, 4B, and 14B respectively, with consistent pass@k gains across all three scales, supported by ablations on loss type, anchor position, layer depth, and loss weight.

Copyleft, as implemented in licenses such as the GNU General Public License, was a legal hack that used copyright to guarantee user freedom by tying the availability of source code to every act of distribution. Its normative force rested on an implicit technical premise: that source code and object code stand in a well-defined, humanly auditable, and reproducible relationship. Large language models and, prospectively, Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) systems systematically violate this premise. The artifacts jointly required to reconstruct a model -- code, data, weights, hyperparameters, toolchain, and hardware configuration -- are each subject to independent legal, technical, and economic constraints that no current open-source framework fully resolves. Sufficiently capable AI systems can also rewrite licensed source into functionally equivalent derivatives stripped of their original obligations, a form of laundering against which copyleft has no effective defense. This paper argues that a functional analogue of copyleft for AGI must be grounded not in share-alike clauses over code, but in reproducible builds: a practice guaranteeing bit-exact reconstructability from declared inputs. We review the logic of copyleft, critically examine Maffulli's Second Liberation thesis according to which AI fulfills Stallman's dream, and show that the argument collapses unless AGI systems are themselves reproducible. Drawing on the Open Source AI Definition (OSAID), the Model Openness Framework (MOF), OpenMDW, and deterministic-inference research, we define seven requirements for AGI-oriented reproducible builds. We further argue that the Model Context Protocol (MCP) and analogous AI-to-AI coupling mechanisms constitute a new dynamic linking layer for which copyleft-style licensing is ill-suited, and that Masnick's "protocols, not platforms" framework offers a more promising governance template.

Estimating the economic contribution of a single patent inside a product that embodies tens of thousands of patents is a long-standing unsolved problem in intellectual property economics. We propose PatentXAI, a framework that treats patent valuation as a problem of explainable AI: given a characteristic function v(S) encoding the revenue achievable by patent subset S, a patent's Shapley value measures its fair share of product profit in a way that satisfies efficiency, symmetry, dummy, and additivity. To make computation tractable we restrict each patent's coalition to its Markov Blanket inside a knowledge graph, grounded in the C-SVE conditional independence theorem (Li et al., 2020). Scaling experiments from n=12 to n=100 patents using Pareto-distributed coverage graphs report median Markov Blanket size of 32.9 percent of n at n=100, with 90th-percentile blanket size of 55.2 percent of n, and runtime of 10 milliseconds per patent. Difference against exact ground truth at n=12 is 0.088; difference against a high-sample Monte Carlo reference at n=100 is 0.062 plus or minus 0.003. A dense-component experiment shows that when 80 percent of patents share one component, the blanket correctly expands to cover that dense cluster, and the difference versus reference falls to 0.039 because the pooled computation becomes more accurate on homogeneous portfolios. Profit allocation proceeds hierarchically: exact Shapley distributes total profit among macro-components, then centrality-weighted Shapley distributes each component budget among covering patents. Estimating v(S) from real data is the primary open problem; we distinguish this from the computational contribution and outline a concrete roadmap for empirical validation using public ETSI, USPTO, and Lens.org datasets.

Generative artificial intelligence has fundamentally changed how content is now produced. It has enabled how high-fidelity text, images, audio, and videos are created, modified, and redistributed at near-zero marginal cost. This shift exposes enterprises and ecosystems to a number of risks across four reinforcing authenticity layers -- authenticity, provenance, integrity, and accountability -- that traditional controls are inadequate to address in isolation. We introduce the concept of authenticity debt: the cumulative institutional liability that accumulates when organizations deploy AI-generated content without preserving verifiable origin, integrity, and accountability, deferring exposure that surfaces under regulatory, legal, or market scrutiny. This paper presents a comprehensive, multi-dimensional taxonomy of generative AI harms and attack vectors, surveys the capabilities and failure modes of technical controls including digital watermarking, provenance frameworks (C2PA, Adobe CAI), and detection technologies, and argues that no single mechanism is sufficient in open, adversarial, and evolving environments. Drawing on Zero Trust Architecture principles and enterprise governance frameworks, we propose a layered reference architecture that integrates cryptographic provenance, human-in-the-loop verification, and continuous governance to sustain defensible authenticity at scale. We further examine the regulatory landscape (EU AI Act, U.S.\ FTC, NIST AI RMF) and identify practical guiding principles for organizations seeking to build authenticity as institutional infrastructure rather than an afterthought.

With the advancement of artificial intelligence systems capable of autonomously generating artistic, literary, musical works, and even inventions without direct human intervention, the intellectual property (IP) regime faces unprecedented questions and challenges. The most critical issue concerns the ownership of moral and economic rights in the absence of a human creator, and how such outputs can be granted legal protection. This paper first reviews the theoretical foundations and existing literature in this domain, then comparatively examines Iranian legal frameworks such as the 1969 Law for the Protection of Authors, Composers, and Artists Rights and the Patent and Trademark Registration Law-alongside other legal systems, including the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Furthermore, existing legal perspectives on the intellectual property of AI-generated works and the related enforcement challenges are analyzed. The findings reveal significant regulatory gaps within the current Iranian legal framework. To balance the promotion of innovation with the preservation of human creativity, revising existing laws and introducing novel approaches such as defining a specific intellectual property right for AI-generated works or designating ownership among associated human agents appears to be essential.

This paper examines how the labour of translators has been transformed into foundational data capital for the age of artificial intelligence (AI). Translation memories (TM) and parallel corpora preserve a one-to-one correspondence between source and target text and therefore constitute extraordinarily valuable supervised training data for machine translation. The development of statistical machine translation (SMT), neural machine translation (NMT), the Transformer architecture, and multilingual large language models (LLMs) cannot be disentangled from the accumulation of such translation data. And yet, translators' renditions have been bought as deliverables under contract, segmented as technical objects, and processed as "information analysis" data under copyright law -- losing their moral, creative, and economic attribution to the translators who produced them. The paper develops two concepts to capture this process. The first is appropriation without consumption: a mode of use in which works are not read, viewed, or listened to, but only mined for statistical features -- a use that is legitimated under Article 30-4 of the Japanese Copyright Act. The second is the invisible teacherisation of translators: the process by which translators, through the construction of translation memories, post-editing, and quality assessment, have functioned as teachers of AI without recognition as such. Drawing on the data supply chain that runs from translators through language service providers (LSPs) and platforms to model developers, on a comparative reading of Japanese, European, and United States legal frameworks, on the distinction between open and proprietary AI models, and on the premium status that human-generated data has acquired in the era of model collapse, the paper asks what translators are actually afraid of, and points toward concrete directions for redistributive design.

Proprietary large language models (LLMs) face risks of intellectual property (IP) violation, as adversaries can replicate an LLM by collecting input-output pairs to train a surrogate model, causing financial setbacks. Watermarks offer a promising defense to verify ownership, but existing methods often struggle with semantic distortion, factual inconsistency, and adversarial attacks. In addition, key-conditioned watermarks for provider-specific detection, especially in cross-provider and multi-user scenarios, remain largely underexplored. To address these challenges, we propose SAFESEAL, a novel key-conditioned watermarking framework that achieves strong detectability with minimal impact on model utility, effectively balancing detectability, utility, and robustness. SAFESEAL preserves named entities while substituting linguistic terms with context-aware synonyms through a key-conditioned Tournament sampling mechanism, maintaining semantic fidelity and factual consistency. For detection, we introduce a key-conditioned contrastive detector that jointly encodes the text and key, enabling provider-specific and robust watermark verification. We derive theoretical bounds on the utility-detectability trade-off and significantly reduce latency through lightweight models, batching, and parallelism. Extensive experiments show that SAFESEAL outperforms baselines in utility, detectability, and robustness, achieving a BERTScore of 0.983, entity similarity of 0.963, a 98.2% detection rate, and the highest human ratings for text quality and content preservation, with latency comparable to the fastest baseline. To promote transparency and community-driven progress, we release the first public watermark leaderboard and an interactive demo.

Formal theorem provers based on large language models (LLMs) are highly sensitive to superficial variations in problem representation: semantically equivalent statements can exhibit drastically different proof success rates, revealing a failure to respect structural symmetries inherent in formal mathematics. This raises a central question: what are the right symmetries for formal theorem proving? We introduce rewriting categories, a category-theoretic framework capturing the compositional, generally non-invertible transformations induced by proof tactics, and use it to formalize two symmetry notions: proof equivariance, governing how proof distributions transform under rewrites, and success invariance (i.e., invariance of success probability), requiring equivalent statements to be solved with the same probability. We observe that state-based next-tactic provers naturally satisfy proof equivariance by operating on proof states. In contrast, state-of-the-art LLM-based provers satisfy neither property, exhibiting large performance variation across equivalent formulations. To mitigate this, we propose test-time methods that aggregate over equivalent rewritings of the input, showing theoretically that they recover success invariance in the sampling limit, and empirically, that they improve robustness and performance under fixed inference budgets. Our results highlight symmetry as a key missing inductive bias in LLM-based theorem proving and suggest test-time computation as a practical route to approximate it.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has enabled users to synthesize music with text prompts, combining copyrighted lyrics, AI-composed melodies, and synthetic vocals that imitate real artists. This paper examines the legal and technical dimensions of AI-based music creation (e.g., Google Gemini's music tools) under U.S. copyright law. We analyze whether a user who inputs one artist's protected lyrics into a GenAI system, directs it to use another artist's voice or style, publishes the resulting song, and monetizes it violates 17 U.S.C. Section 106's exclusive rights [3]. The analysis integrates Title 17 doctrine (rights of reproduction, derivative works, distribution), 17 U.S.C. Section 114's narrow sound recording protection [4], and the new voice-cloning laws emerging at the state level [20]. We argue that unauthorized lyric copying poses a high risk of infringement of the musical composition, whereas mere AI-generated voice imitation typically falls outside federal sound recording protection and instead implicates state publicity rights [12], [13]. Recent cases and legislation (Concord v. Anthropic [10]; Kadrey v. Meta [11]; Lehrman v. Lovo [12]; Tennessee's "ELVIS Act" [20]; UMG v. Uncharted Labs [14]; etc.) illustrate this split. We map AI technical components (prompt encoding, latent diffusion, neural vocoders, speaker embeddings) to legal risks and identify a regulatory gap: federal law robustly protects lyrics and melody but currently provides limited remedies for synthesized vocal likeness [22], [23]. The paper concludes with policy suggestions for clearer rules on AI music creation.

The latest improvements in artificial intelligence (AI) raise new challenges for intellectual property laws, particularly concerning the inventorship issue in AI-assisted inventions - that is, those in which AI is used in the inventive process. While most jurisdictions allow only a natural person to be considered the inventor, the question of how to deal with AI-assisted inventions remains relevant. Namely, what is the nature and contribution of AI tools in an AI-assisted invention that would prevent a human from being recognized as its inventor? The main challenge in addressing this question is the lack of case law on the issue. It is reasonable to assume that with the development of AI and the growing interest in its use in the inventive process, new cases will naturally arise, which in turn will harmonize and address the inventorship issue in AI-assisted inventions to some extent. However, this process will take significant time and may not keep pace with the rapid development of AI, nor fully address the new problems that arise alongside AI advancements. This research proposes the conditions of an experiment to create relevant case law. This experiment could be initiated by society, involving stakeholders specializing in AI. The article also proposes a methodology for conducting the experiment and selecting cases that best reflect the current state of AI use in the inventive process. Conducting such an approach will help identify the most effective methods for measuring human contribution to AI-assisted inventions when determining inventorship.

Training data attribution (TDA) for music generation must answer two questions that copyright analysis requires, namely which training songs influence a generated output and along which musical aspects the influence operates. Existing methods reduce influence to a single scalar, without revealing which musical aspects are dominant in that influence. We propose ARIA, a framework that decomposes attribution along musical aspects (five for symbolic music, three for audio) and pairs the decomposition with reliability diagnostics computed from the segment-level score matrix. It measures within-group similarity among the top-K attributed tracks against random reference groups drawn from the training pool, and diagnoses the score matrix through its singular value decomposition and column statistics. On a symbolic-music model where attribution ground truth is available through counterfactual retraining, the reliability diagnostics rank four attribution methods identically to that ground truth. On an audio music generation model, ARIA reveals attribution behaviors that vary substantially across TDA methods, flags score matrices whose retrieved tracks are nearly identical across queries rather than reflecting per-query attribution, and characterizes embedding-similarity retrieval baselines by the musical aspect each encoder surfaces. Together, ARIA produces per-aspect attribution evidence aligned with the musical aspects considered under the idea-expression distinction in copyright analysis.

Long-horizon AI agents execute complex workflows spanning hundreds of sequential actions, yet a single wrong assumption early on can cascade into irreversible errors. When instructions are incomplete, the agent must decide not only whether to ask for clarification but when, and no prior work measures how clarification value changes over the course of execution. We introduce a forced-injection framework that provides ground-truth clarifications at controlled points in the agent's trajectory across four information dimensions (goal, input, constraint, context), three agent benchmarks, and four frontier models (three per benchmark; one on a single benchmark only; 84 task variants; 6,000+ runs). Counter to the common intuition that "earlier is always better," we find that the value of clarification depends sharply on what information is missing: goal clarification loses nearly all value after 10% of execution (pass@3 drops from 0.78 to baseline), while input clarification retains value through roughly 50%. Deferring any clarification type past mid-trajectory degrades performance below never asking at all. Cross-model Kendall tau correlations (0.78-0.87 among models sharing identical task coverage; 0.34-0.67 across the full 4-model panel) confirm these timing profiles are substantially task-intrinsic. A complementary study of 300 unscripted sessions reveals that no current frontier model asks within the empirically optimal window, with strategies ranging from over-asking (52% of sessions) to never asking at all. These empirical demand curves provide the quantitative foundation that existing theoretical frameworks require but have lacked, and establish concrete design targets for timing-aware clarification policies. Code and data will be publicly released.

LLM agents rely on prompts to implement task-specific capabilities based on foundation LLMs, making agent prompts valuable intellectual property. However, in untrusted deployments, adversaries can copy and reuse these prompts with other proprietary LLMs, causing economic losses. To protect these prompts, we identify four key challenges: proactivity, runtime protection, usability, and non-portability that existing approaches fail to address. We present PragLocker, a prompt protection scheme that satisfies these requirements. PragLocker constructs function-preserving obfuscated prompts by anchoring semantics with code symbols and then using target-model feedback to inject noise, yielding prompts that only work on the target LLM. Experiments across multiple agent systems, datasets, and foundation LLMs show that PragLocker substantially reduces cross-LLM portability, maintains target performance, and remains robust against adaptive attackers.

Contrastive learning (CL) reduces annotation cost via auto-derived supervisory signals. Since large-scale in-house CL datasets are infeasible, reliance on third-party or internet data is common. Recent studies show CL models are vulnerable to data-poisoning backdoor attacks, but their generalization and robustness are underexplored. We systematically evaluate existing data-poisoning backdoor attacks on CL, revealing limitations: poor dataset adaptability, low success rates, limited portability, and restrictive assumptions (e.g., downstream task knowledge). Interestingly, trigger samples exhibit distinguishable statistical divergence from clean samples, which inspires repurposing it as a watermark for dataset IP protection. Direct repurposing is challenging due to low success rates; we overcome this by statistical verification using a unified density metric. We further propose a multi-level watermarking scheme adapting to feature-level, soft-label, or hard-label outputs in CL. Experiments show some backdoor attacks can be repurposed as effective watermarks with trade-offs among fidelity, verifiability, and robustness. This work demonstrates weak backdoor effects become reliable signals for dataset IP protection in challenging CL settings.

Domestic voice assistants and smart-home devices are increasingly embedded in everyday routines, yet their ethics are often treated as an afterthought or delegated to compliance teams. To explore how expectations about smart-home AI are constructed and managed, we conducted 33 semi-structured interviews with designers, developers, and researchers from major smart-home platforms (Amazon Alexa, Microsoft Azure IoT, and Google Nest). Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we develop Expectations Management (EM): a culturally embedded model describing how practitioners shape, calibrate, and repair expectations by balancing organisational rights with culturally situated rites. We show that EM differs from expectation-confirmation theory and trust-calibration by foregrounding moral judgement, situated action, and cross-cultural variation. Our analysis reveals four recurring design tensions: automation vs. autonomy, helpfulness vs. intrusiveness, personalisation vs. predictability, and transparency vs. obscurity and distils them into a five-phase EM Design Playbook that supports moral prudence. We discuss implications for responsible smart-home design and offer guidance for human-centred AI.

While annotated corpora are crucial in the field of natural language processing (NLP), those containing copyrighted material are difficult to exchange among researchers. Yet, such corpora are necessary to fully represent the diversity of data found in the wild in the context of NLP tasks. We tackle this issue by proposing a method to lawfully and publicly share the annotations of copyrighted literary texts. The corpus creator shares the annotations in clear, along with a non-reversible hashed version of the source material. The corpus user must own the source material, and apply the same hash function to their own tokens, in order to match them to the shared annotations. Crucially, our method is robust to reasonable divergences in the version of the copyrighted data owned by the user. As an illustration, we present alignment experiments on different editions of novels. Our results show that our method is able to correctly align 98.7 to 99.79% of tokens depending on the novel, provided the user version is sufficiently close to the corpus creator's version. We publicly release novelshare, a Python implementation of our method.

Patent retrieval underpins critical decisions in innovation, examination, and IP strategy, yet progress has been hampered by the absence of benchmarks that reflect the diversity of real world search scenarios. We address this gap with two contributions. First, we introduce Sophiabench, a large-scale patent retrieval benchmark comprising 10,000 queries and 75,000 corpus documents stratified across ten years, eight IPC technology sections, and twelve filing jurisdictions. Unlike prior benchmarks, Sophia-bench tests retrieval using 12 different query types-from structured patent fields to AI-generated summaries-and evaluates results against citation-based ground truth enhanced with a novel domain-relevance metric (InScope). Together, these enable systematic measurement of how well models perform across query types, technology domains, and jurisdictions. Second, we introduce QaECTER, a 344M-parameter embedding model trained on patent citation graphs and multi-view self-alignment. Despite its compact size, QaECTER establishes a new state of the art for patent retrieval. It outperforms the #1 model on the English retrieval text embedding benchmark (RTEB), a model 23x larger, as well as all existing patent specific models across every query type, IPC section, and jurisdiction on Sophia-bench, with gains of up to 7.2% average NDCG@10 over the next-best model. These results are confirmed on an independent external benchmark, where QaECTER surpasses all prior models without requiring task-specific instruction prompts. Both the benchmark and the model are designed for practical deployment in large-scale patent search systems.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) systems that can automatically generate content in the form of source code or other contents (e.g., images) has seen increasing popularity due to the emergence of tools such as ChatGPT which rely on Large Language Models (LLMs). Misuse of the automatically generated content can incur serious consequences due to potential harms in the generated content. Despite the importance of ensuring the quality of automatically generated content, there is little to no approach that can systematically generate tests for identifying software harms in the content generated by these GAI systems. In this article, we introduce the novel concept of ethics testing which aims to systematically generate tests for identifying software harms. Different from existing testing methodologies (e.g., fairness testing that aims to identifying software discrimination), ethics testing aims to systematically detect software harms that could be induced due to unethical behavior (e.g., harmful behavior or behavior that violates intellectual property rights) in automatically generated content. We introduced the concept of ethics testing, discussed the challenges therewithin, and conducted five case studies to show how ethics testing can be performed for generative AI systems.

We present a formally verified framework for patent analysis as a hybrid AI + Lean 4 pipeline. The DAG-coverage core (Algorithm 1b) is fully machine-verified once bounded match scores are fixed. Freedom-to-operate, claim-construction sensitivity, cross-claim consistency, and doctrine-of-equivalents analyses are formalized at the specification level with kernel-checked candidate certificates. Existing patent-analysis approaches rely on manual expert analysis (slow, non-scalable) or ML/NLP methods (probabilistic, opaque, non-compositional). To our knowledge, this is the first framework that applies interactive theorem proving based on dependent type theory to intellectual property analysis. Claims are encoded as DAGs in Lean 4, match strengths as elements of a verified complete lattice, and confidence scores propagate through dependencies via proven-correct monotone functions. We formalize five IP use cases (patent-to-product mapping, freedom-to-operate, claim construction sensitivity, cross-claim consistency, doctrine of equivalents) via six algorithms. Structural lemmas, the coverage-core generator, and the closed-path identity coverage = W_cov are machine-verified in Lean 4. Higher-level theorems for the other use cases remain informal proof sketches, and their proof-generation functions are architecturally mitigated (untrusted generators whose outputs are kernel-checked and sorry-free axiom-audited). Guarantees are conditional on the ML layer: they certify mathematical correctness of computations downstream of ML scores, not the accuracy of the scores themselves. A case study on a synthetic memory-module claim demonstrates weighted coverage and construction-sensitivity analysis. Validation against adjudicated cases is future work.

As generative AI faces intensifying legal challenges, the machine learning community has increasingly relied on post-hoc mitigation -- especially machine unlearning and inference-time guardrails -- to argue for compliance. This paper argues that such post-hoc mitigation methods cannot retroactively cure liability from unlawful acquisition and training, because compliance hinges on data lineage, not the outputs. Our argument has three parts. First, unauthorized copying/ingestion can be a legally complete completed act, and model weights may operate as fixed copies that retain training-derived expressive value, making later filtering beside the point for infringement. Second, contract and tort/unfair-competition rules -- via licenses, terms of service, and anti-free-riding principles -- can independently restrict access and use, often bypassing copyright defenses (e.g., fair use or TDM exceptions). Third, since value from protected inputs can persist in weights, remedies such as unjust enrichment and disgorgement may require stripping gains and, in some cases, reaching the model itself. We therefore argue for a shift from Post-Hoc Sanitization to verifiable Ex-Ante Process Compliance.

Frontier LLM companies have repeatedly assured courts and regulators that their models do not store copies of training data. They further rely on safety alignment strategies via RLHF, system prompts, and output filters to block verbatim regurgitation of copyrighted works, and have cited the efficacy of these measures in their legal defenses against copyright infringement claims. We show that finetuning bypasses these protections: by training models to expand plot summaries into full text, a task naturally suited for commercial writing assistants, we cause GPT-4o, Gemini-2.5-Pro, and DeepSeek-V3.1 to reproduce up to 85-90% of held-out copyrighted books, with single verbatim spans exceeding 460 words, using only semantic descriptions as prompts and no actual book text. This extraction generalizes across authors: finetuning exclusively on Haruki Murakami's novels unlocks verbatim recall of copyrighted books from over 30 unrelated authors. The effect is not specific to any training author or corpus: random author pairs and public-domain finetuning data produce comparable extraction, while finetuning on synthetic text yields near-zero extraction, indicating that finetuning on individual authors' works reactivates latent memorization from pretraining. Three models from different providers memorize the same books in the same regions ($r \ge 0.90$), pointing to an industry-wide vulnerability. Our findings offer compelling evidence that model weights store copies of copyrighted works and that the security failures that manifest after finetuning on individual authors' works undermine a key premise of recent fair use rulings, where courts have conditioned favorable outcomes on the adequacy of measures preventing reproduction of protected expression.

Language models (LMs) tend to memorize portions of their training data and emit verbatim spans. When the underlying sources are sensitive or copyright-protected, such reproduction raises issues of consent and compensation for creators and compliance risks for developers. We propose Anchored Decoding, a plug-and-play inference-time method for suppressing verbatim copying: it enables decoding from any risky LM trained on mixed-license data by keeping generation in bounded proximity to a permissively trained safe LM. Anchored Decoding adaptively allocates a user-chosen information budget over the generation trajectory and enforces per-step constraints that yield a sequence-level guarantee, enabling a tunable risk-utility trade-off. To make Anchored Decoding practically useful, we introduce a new permissively trained safe model (TinyComma 1.8B), as well as Anchored$_{\mathrm{Byte}}$ Decoding, a byte-level variant of our method that enables cross-vocabulary fusion via the ByteSampler framework (Hayase et al., 2025). Across six model pairs on long-form metrics for copying risk and utility, Anchored and Anchored$_{\mathrm{Byte}}$ Decoding define a new Pareto frontier, preserving near-original fluency and factuality while closing up to 75% of the measurable copying gap between the risky baseline and a safe reference, at a modest inference overhead.