Cyprus Construction Trends: Permit Count Slips While Value and Scale Surge in 2025

The Cyprus Statistical Service (Cystat) has reported a notable shift in the construction landscape for 2025. The latest figures reveal a modest 1.9% decline in building permits issued in March compared to the same month last year, signaling a nuanced trend in the nation’s developmental activities.

Permit Count Decline in March

In March 2025, authorities authorised 572 building permits—down from 583 in March 2024. The permits, which total a value of €361.5 million and cover 296,900 square metres of construction, underscore a cautious pace in permit approval despite ongoing projects. Notably, these permits are set to facilitate the construction of 1,480 dwelling units, reflecting an underlying demand in the housing sector.

Follow THE FUTURE on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, X and Telegram

Q1 2025: Growth in Value, Construction Area, and Dwelling Units

While the number of permits in the first quarter (January to March) decreased by 15.8% from 1,876 to 1,580, more significant, economically relevant metrics saw robust growth. Total permit value surged by 21.7%, and the authorised construction area expanded by 15.6%. Additionally, the number of prospective dwelling units increased by 16.7% compared to the corresponding period last year. This divergence suggests that although fewer permits were issued, the scale and ambition of the approved projects have intensified.

New Regulatory Framework and the Ippodamos System

Since 1 July 2024, a pivotal transition has taken place in permit administration. The responsibility for issuing permits has moved from municipalities and district administration offices to the newly established local government organisations (EOAs). The integrated information system, Ippodamos, now oversees the licensing process, streamlining data collection on both residential and non-residential projects across urban and rural areas.

Comprehensive Data Collection for Enhanced Oversight

The Ippodamos system categorises construction projects using the EU Classification of Types of Construction (CC). This platform gathers extensive data on the number of permits authorised, project area and value, and the expected number of dwelling units. It covers a broad spectrum of construction activities—from new builds and civil engineering projects to plot divisions and road construction—while excluding renewals and building divisions. The thoroughness of this new regulatory structure promises greater operational transparency and more informed decision-making for policymakers and industry stakeholders.

The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties

Copyright Law Struggles To Keep Up With AI Training

by News Editor

August 24, 2026

Courts Are Still Applying Old Copyright Rules To AI

AI companies train models on enormous amounts of published material, including books, articles and academic research. Whether using that content without authors’ permission violates copyright law remains unresolved.

Much of the debate centres on fair use, which allows copyrighted material to be used without permission in certain circumstances. Courts consider factors such as the purpose of the use, how much material was involved and its impact on the original market.

Follow THE FUTURE on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, X and Telegram

Anthropic Case Sets An Important Precedent

A major case involving Anthropic and a group of authors provided one of the clearest rulings so far. Judge William Alsup found that using copyrighted books to train AI models was lawful, comparing the process to people reading and studying literature before creating something new.

Anthropic was nevertheless ordered to pay $1.5 billion in a settlement. The penalty concerned books the company had obtained from illegal online libraries rather than the AI training itself.

For AI companies, that distinction could prove significant because it separates studying copyrighted material from directly copying it.

Competition Could Be The Key Issue

A case involving Thomson Reuters and Ross Intelligence offers a different perspective. A court ruled that Ross could not claim fair use after using Reuters’ copyrighted material to develop a competing AI-powered legal research platform.

The decision suggests courts may be less willing to consider AI training fair use when copyrighted content is used to build a product that directly competes with the original.

For authors, an unresolved question is whether AI-generated content should be considered competition for the works used to train these models.

The Law Has Yet To Catch Up

US copyright law predates generative AI by decades, leaving courts to apply old principles to new technology. Questions also remain over copyright protection for AI-generated works. In Thaler v. Perlmutter, a court ruled that material created entirely by AI cannot receive copyright protection.

Major AI companies remain involved in copyright litigation, and different courts could reach different conclusions. For now, there is no universal rule: the legality of AI training will depend on the circumstances of each case and how courts ultimately interpret copyright and fair use.

Breaking news