Breaking news

Cyprus’ Aquaculture Position: Fishy Figures Or Future Growth?

In 2023, the European Union witnessed a collective aquaculture output of approximately 1.1 million tonnes, a diverse assortment of fish, molluscs, algae, and crustaceans. Europe’s top contributors—Spain, France, and Greece—dominated the scene, according to recent Eurostat data. However, Cyprus finds itself further down the list, ranking 19th with a production of 5,700 tonnes, trailing significantly behind Malta, positioned at 11th with 20,803 tonnes.

Leading the charge, Spain reached a notable 242,754 tonnes, and alongside France at 186,561 tonnes and Greece at 140,908 tonnes, they form the trinity of aquaculture powerhouses in the EU. These three nations collectively command a major share of the sector, capturing 23.1%, 17.8%, and 13.4% respectively of the union’s output.

Cyprus’s contribution, although modest in comparison, still sums up to €39 million of EU’s €4.8 billion aquaculture production market. Interestingly, current economic dynamics may play a pivotal role in shaping future opportunities in Cyprus’ sectors.

A Journey Of Ebb And Flow

Cyprus saw its aquaculture volumes rise from 3,776 tonnes in 2008 to a peak of 7,346 tonnes in 2018, only to dip back by 2023. The fluctuations reflect a regional pattern as well, where Greece experienced growth, Spain encountered a downtrend post-2018, and France remained relatively stable.

The EU’s aquaculture production primarily centers around finfish—like trout, seabream, seabass, carp, tuna, and salmon—as well as molluscs including mussels, oysters, and clams, with mussels leading at 34.5%. Trout, seabass, and gilthead seabream featured prominently in terms of economic value too, pinning down the top three slots amongst valuable species.

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.

Uol
The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties
Aretilaw firm
eCredo

Become a Speaker

Become a Speaker

Become a Partner

Subscribe for our weekly newsletter