Breaking news

ECB Digital Euro Reinforces Banks’ Role In European Payments

ECB Underlines Banks’ Strategic Involvement

The European Central Bank is charting a course for the digital euro that reinforces the central role banks have long played in the euro zone’s payments infrastructure. In a rapidly evolving digital economy, the ECB is ensuring that traditional financial institutions and European card schemes are not sidelined in the transition to central bank digital currency.

Preserving Bank-Centric Payment Ecosystems

Designed as a currency managed directly through accounts held at the central bank, the digital euro initiative is positioned to secure banks’ presence in payment flows, countering the potential disintermediation posed by private digital solutions, including stablecoins. ECB Executive Board Member Piero Cipollone highlighted in his recent address to Italy’s banking association ABI that the evolving payments landscape, marked by the rise of private digital currencies, could erode banks’ traditional roles unless proactive measures are taken.

Competitive Fee Structures To Bolster Domestic Schemes

The policy framework for the digital euro intends to advantage domestic payment networks. The ECB has committed to setting fee structures that are more favourable to merchants than international networks such as Visa and Mastercard, without completely undercutting the lower charges typically seen in national systems. This deliberate pricing strategy is designed to protect lucrative revenue streams and crucial customer data, ensuring banks retain both transactional control and the ability to offer higher margin services.

Enhancing European Economic Security

Recent endorsements by the European Parliament and the EU Council have pushed the digital euro into the spotlight as a key asset for Europe’s economic security. With a significant share of European transactions currently processed through international networks, the digital euro initiative not only enhances payment efficiency but also reinforces the strategic autonomy of the euro zone by favoring domestic schemes and traditional banking structures.

Copyright Law Struggles To Keep Up With AI Training

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.

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.

The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties
eCredo
Uol
Aretilaw firm

Become a Speaker

Become a Speaker

Become a Partner

Subscribe for our weekly newsletter