Cypriot Government Weighs €25 Million Payment for Strategic Energy Interconnector Amid Viability Concerns

by THEFUTURE.TEAM

August 28, 2025

Government Weighs Financial Commitment

The Cypriot government is currently evaluating the prospect of channeling a €25-million payment to Greece’s independent transmission system operator, Admie, as part of the financial framework for the Great Sea Interconnector project. This ambitious initiative aims to eventually link the energy grids of Cyprus, Greece, and Israel, a move that could significantly reshape regional energy dynamics.

Balancing Financial Viability With Strategic Ambition

Finance Minister Makis Keravnos emphasized that while the financial commitment under consideration could pave the way for reduced energy prices in the long term, the project’s financial viability remains under close scrutiny. “Many aspects of the issue must be ensured,” Keravnos stated, stressing that the project must secure its financial fundamentals before any significant financial obligations are undertaken.

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

Technical and Strategic Hurdles

Despite the Cyprus Energy Regulatory Authority’s (Cera) preliminary approval of the €25-million arrangement—the first of five annual payments—Keravnos noted that the decision is still mired in uncertainties. Other governmental departments are currently addressing the technical issues that could impact the project’s overall implementation, including incomplete seabed surveys crucial for determining the optimal routing and costs associated with laying submarine cables.

Consumer Impact and the State Aid Conundrum

Keravnos expressed concerns about transferring costs to taxpayers and consumers alike. The initial plan was to use funds from the European Union’s Emissions Trading System (ETS) to finance the payments. However, Admie raised alarms that such an approach might contravene EU state aid regulations, potentially forcing the energy regulatory body to shift the burden onto consumers. “Taxpayers’ money will be paid so that consumers do not have to pay, but all taxpayers are also consumers,” Keravnos remarked, highlighting the inherent complexities of the proposal.

Next Steps and the Road Ahead

Ultimately, the government’s stance hinges on tangible progress in project implementation. Should the Great Sea Interconnector move forward with more definitive technical milestones, the government might reconsider its current caution. Until the essential surveys and subsequent assessments provide clear cost projections, policymakers remain hesitant to fully endorse the proposed financial arrangement.

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