EIB Doubles Defence Financing, Expands Eligible Projects While Excluding Weapons

The European Investment Bank (EIB) has announced significant changes to its financing approach for defence projects, including the removal of existing limits on funding and an expanded scope of eligible projects. However, the EIB will still maintain a ban on financing weapons and ammunition.

Ahead of a key defence summit this Thursday, Nadia Calvino, EIB President, outlined plans to EU leaders in a letter, revealing that the bank’s measures are part of the European Union’s broader initiative to enhance defence financing in response to growing security concerns, particularly in light of the ongoing threat from Russia.

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

As part of the new strategy, the EIB plans to propose a revision to its eligibility criteria during its March Board of Directors meeting. The adjustments aim to better define excluded activities, keeping them as minimal and precise as possible. Additionally, the bank is set to revise its operational framework to establish an annual financial and capital allocation for defence, ensuring it meets the increasing demands of the EU’s security needs while maintaining the bank’s strong financial position and ability to support other strategic priorities.

The EIB’s balance sheet totals €600 billion, and previously, the bank had targeted doubling its financing for defence projects to €2 billion by 2025, with an upper limit of €8 billion by 2027. With this new policy, the EIB will be able to fund large-scale strategic defence projects that include land border protection, military mobility, infrastructure protection, de-mining, cybersecurity, drones, and other critical technologies.

The change signals a shift in the EIB’s core public policy objectives, placing defence and security on par with other priorities like cohesion and sustainability. The new approach will allow financing for projects such as barracks, radars, helicopters, military facilities, and other infrastructure with no civilian use. However, weapons and ammunition will still be off-limits for EIB funding.

The shift in policy is also seen as a signal to investors and financial institutions, emphasizing that security and defence are now considered essential public goods. This stance contrasts with the bank’s exclusion of activities like gambling, tobacco, or pornography, sending a clear message that EU governments are prioritizing investment in national and regional security.

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