Compound Interest Practices Under Scrutiny In Credit Acquisition Lending

by THEFUTURE.TEAM

February 16, 2026

Compound Interest Practices Under Scrutiny

Finance Minister Makis Keravnos has raised significant concerns regarding the reputation of compound interest mechanisms in loans managed by credit acquisition firms. The minister underscored that this issue, which paints a problematic picture of escalating loan debt, remains a priority for review.

Data-Driven Analysis And Consultations

Speaking at the Ministry of Finance, Keravnos explained that the assessment relies heavily on data held by the Central Bank, alongside input from ongoing consultations with financial institutions and supervisory bodies. The aim, he said, is to ensure that any policy response is grounded in verified figures rather than assumptions.

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

Responding to questions about whether compound interest has led to disproportionate debt accumulation, the minister acknowledged that existing practices have indeed created public concern. He emphasized that authorities are examining the full scope of available data before drawing conclusions or proposing changes.

Legislative Outlook And Strategic Caution

During a recent session with the Parliamentary Finance Committee, Keravnos discussed a range of financial oversight matters, including interest rate policies. While lawmakers raised the possibility of new legislative frameworks or alternative repayment models, the minister clarified that no formal proposals have yet been finalized. He stressed that any intervention must be carefully calibrated, particularly as international rating agencies continue to monitor the country’s financial stability.

Enhanced Oversight In Business Practices

Addressing broader compliance issues within the financial sector, Keravnos stated that supervisory mechanisms are already in place and functioning effectively. Regular inspections conducted in cooperation with law enforcement agencies, he noted, help ensure that companies adhere to existing regulations and transparency standards.

Drawing on his experience in financial auditing and policy oversight, the minister reiterated that the government’s priority is to preserve trust in the credit system while protecting borrowers from potentially excessive practices. The current review, he added, is intended not only to clarify public concerns but also to reinforce long-term financial integrity.

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