The Future Of Online Casino Regulation In Cyprus: Balancing Exclusivity And Innovation

by THEFUTURE.TEAM

October 19, 2025

Regulatory Landscape And Exclusivity Concerns

Stringent regulatory measures and legal exclusivities underscore the current discourse surrounding online casino operations in Cyprus. The sole operating license issued to date is for the integrated casino resort in Limassol and its satellite outlets. This legal framework, established under Law 124(I)/2015 and the 2017 concession agreement, grants exclusive rights to the physical casino entity, prompting regulators to assess whether such exclusivity should extend into the digital realm.

Exploring International Models And Regulatory Alternatives

The National Gaming Authority is actively examining international regulatory models, including those employed in Malta and Gibraltar, where online casinos are licensed exclusively for operations aimed at offshore markets. This comparative analysis aims to tailor international best practices to the specific nuances of the Cypriot market, ensuring that any regulatory evolution is both comprehensive and adaptable.

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

Institutional Preparedness And Strategic Oversight

Emphasizing a robust institutional capacity, the regulatory body has highlighted its extensive expertise, certified information systems, and specialized personnel, underpinned by reputable international collaborations. The Authority remains vigilant, systematically monitoring global developments and ready to offer data-driven recommendations to fortify Cyprus’s regulatory framework should the online casino sector be legalized.

Economic Implications And The Call For Legal Reform

Industry advocates, including the Cyprus Online Gaming Association (COGA) – which features major betting companies such as Stoiximan, Bet365, and Bet On Alfa – argue that a formal regulatory framework would not only safeguard players but also bolster public revenues. In the absence of legislation, legitimate operators and public finances remain vulnerable, while unauthorized platforms continue to expose citizens to potential fraud and significant financial losses.

Conclusion: Strategic Regulation For Sustainable Growth

As Cyprus contemplates the extension of its casino licensing to include online gambling, the emphasis remains on transparency, accountability, and consumer protection. The evolution of this regulatory paradigm promises to safeguard public interests while promoting a balanced environment that facilitates innovation alongside fiscal and operational discipline.

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