@DavidSacks Isn’t a Neutral Observer—He’s an Architect of the AI Circular-Investment Maze

When White House AI Czar David Sacks tweets confidently that “there will be no federal bailout for AI” because “five major frontier model companies” will simply replace each other, he is not speaking as a neutral observer. He is speaking as a venture capitalist with overlapping financial ties to the very AI companies now engaged in the most circular investment structure Silicon Valley has engineered since the dot-com bubble—but on a scale measured not in millions or even billions, but in trillions.

Sacks is a PayPal alumnus turned political-tech kingmaker who has positioned himself at the intersection of public policy and private AI investment. His recent stint as a Special Government Employee to the federal government raised eyebrows precisely because of this dual role. Yet he now frames the AI sector as a robust ecosystem that can absorb firm-level failure without systemic consequence.

The numbers say otherwise. The diagram circulating in the X-thread exposes the real structure: mutually dependent investments tied together through cross-equity stakes, GPU pre-purchases, cloud-compute lock-ins, and stock-option-backed revenue games. So Microsoft invests in OpenAI; OpenAI pays Microsoft for cloud resources; Microsoft books the revenue and inflates its stake OpenAI. Nvidia invests in OpenAI; OpenAI buys tens of billions in Nvidia chips; Nvidia’s valuation inflates; and that valuation becomes the collateral propping up the entire sector. Oracle buys Nvidia chips; OpenAI signs a $300 billion cloud deal with Oracle; Oracle books the upside. Every player’s “growth” relies on every other player’s spending.

This is not competition. It is a closed liquidity loop. And it’s a repeat of the dot-bomb “carriage” deals that contributed to the stock market crash in 2000.

And underlying all of it is the real endgame: a frantic rush to secure taxpayer-funded backstops—through federal energy deals, subsidized data-center access, CHIPS-style grants, or Department of Energy land leases—to pay for the staggering infrastructure costs required to keep this circularity spinning. The singularity may be speculative, but the push for a public subsidy to sustain it is very real.

Call it what it is: an industry searching for a government-sized safety net while insisting it doesn’t need one.

In the meantime, the circular investing game serves another purpose: it manufactures sky-high paper valuations that can be recycled into legal war chests. Those inflated asset values are now being used to bankroll litigation and lobbying campaigns aimed at rewriting copyright, fair use, and publicity law so that AI firms can keep strip-mining culture without paying for it.

The same feedback loop that props up their stock prices is funding the effort to devalue the work of every writer, musician, actor, and visual artist on the planet—and to lock that extraction in as a permanent feature of the digital economy.

Don’t Let Congress Reward the Stations That Don’t Pay Artists

As we’ve been posting about for years—alongside Blake Morgan and the #IRespectMusic movement that you guys have been so good about supporting—there’s still a glaring failure at the heart of U.S. copyright law: performing artists and session musicians receive no royalty for AM/FM radio airplay. Every other developed country (and practically every other country) compensates performers for broadcast use, yet the United States continues to exempt terrestrial radio from paying the people who record the music.

Now Congress is preparing to pass the AM Radio in Every Car Act, a massive government intervention that would literally install the instrument of unfairness into every new car at significant cost to consumers. It’s a breathtaking example of how far the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) will go to preserve its century-old free ride—by lobbying for public subsidies while refusing to pay artists a penny. This isn’t public service; it’s policy cruelty dressed up as nostalgia.

Hundreds of artists have already spoken out in a letter to Congress demanding fairness through the American Music Fairness Act (AMFA). Their action matters—and yours does too.

👉 Here’s what you can do:

Don’t let Washington hard-wire injustice into every dashboard. Demand that Congress fix the problem before it funds the next generation of unfairness.

Dear Speaker Johnson, Leader Jeffries, Leader Thune, and Leader Schumer:

Earlier this year, we wrote urging that you take action on the American Music Fairness Act (S.253/H.R.791), legislation that will require that AM/FM radio companies start paying artists for their music. We are grateful for your attention to ensuring America’s recording artists are finally paid for use of our work.

As you may know, some members of Congress are currently seeking to pass legislation that will require every new vehicle manufactured in the United States come pre-installed with AM radio. The passage of the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act (S.315/H.R.979) would mark another major windfall for the corporate radio industry that makes $13.6 billion each year in advertising revenue while refusing to compensate the performers whose songs play 240 million times each year on AM radio stations. Every year, recording artists lose out on hundreds of millions of dollars in royalties in the U.S. and abroad because of this hundred-year-old loophole.

This is wrong. In the United States of America, every person deserves to be paid for the use of their work. But because of the power held by giant radio corporations in Washington, artists, both big and small, continue to be overlooked, even as every other music delivery platform, including streaming services and satellite radio, pays both the songwriter and performer.

We are asking today that you insist that any legislation that includes the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act also include the American Music Fairness Act. We do not oppose terrestrial radio. In fact, we appreciate the role that radio has played in our careers and within society, but the 100-year-old argument of promotion that radio continues to hide behind does not ring true in 2025.

When you save the radio industry by mandating its technology remain in cars, we ask that you save the musician too and allow us to be paid fairly when our music is played.

Thank you again for your consideration of this much-needed legislation.

Sincerely,

Barry Manilow

Boyz II Men

Carole King

Cyndi Lauper

Debbie Gibson

Def Leppard

Gloria Gaynor

Kool and the Gang

Lee Ann Womack

Lil Jon

Mike Love

Nancy Wilson

Peter Frampton

Sammy Hagar

Smokey Robinson

TLC

Senator Josh @HawleyMO Throws Down on Big Tech’s Copyright Theft

 I believe Americans should have the ability to defend their human data, and their rights to that data, against the largest copyright theft in the history of the world. 

Millions of Americans have spent the past two decades speaking and engaging online. Many of you here today have online profiles and writings and creative productions that you care deeply about. And rightly so. It’s your work. It’s you.

What if I told you that AI models have already been trained on enough copyrighted works to fill the Library of Congress 22 times over? For me, that makes it very simple: We need a legal mechanism that allows Americans to freely defend those creations. I say let’s empower human beings by protecting the very human data they create. Assign property rights to specific forms of data, create legal liability for the companies who use that data and, finally, fully repeal Section 230. Open the courtroom doors. Let the people sue those who take their rights, including those who do it using AI.

Third, we must add sensible guardrails to the emergent AI economy and hold concentrated economic power to account. These giant companies have made no secret of their ambitions to radically reshape our economic life. So, we ought to require transparency and reporting each time they replace a working man with a machine.

And the government should inspect all of these frontier AI systems, so we can better understand what the tech titans plan to build and deploy. 

Ultimately, when it comes to guardrails, protecting our children should be our lodestar. You may have seen recently how Meta green-lit its own chatbots to have sensual conversations with children—yes, you heard me right. Meta’s own internal documents permitted lurid conversations that no parent would ever contemplate. And most tragically, ChatGPT recently encouraged a troubled teenager to commit suicide—even providing detailed instructions on how to do it.

We absolutely must require and enforce rigorous technical standards to bar inappropriate or harmful interactions with minors. And we should think seriously about age verification for chatbots and agents. We don’t let kids drive or drink or do a thousand other harmful things. The same standards should apply to AI.

Fourth and finally, while Congress gets its act together to do all of this, we can’t kneecap our state governments from moving first. Some of you may have seen that there was a major effort in Congress to ban states from regulating AI for 10 years—and a whole decade is an eternity when it comes to AI development and deployment. This terrible policy was nearly adopted in the reconciliation bill this summer, and it could have thrown out strong anti-porn and child online safety laws, to name a few. Think about that: conservatives out to destroy the very concept of federalism that they cherish … all in the name of Big Tech. Well, we killed it on the Senate floor. And we ought to make sure that bad idea stays dead.

We’ve faced technological disruption before—and we’ve acted to make technology serve us, the people. Powered flight changed travel forever, but you can’t land a plane on your driveway. Splitting the atom fundamentally changed our view of physics, but nobody expects to run a personal reactor in their basement. The internet completely recast communication and media, but YouTube will still take down your video if you violate a copyright. By the same token, we can—and we should—demand that AI empower Americans, not destroy their rights . . . or their jobs . . . or their lives.

@johnpgatta Interviews @davidclowery in Jambands

David Lowery sits down with John Patrick Gatta at Jambands for a wide-ranging conversation that threads 40 years of Camper Van Beethoven and Cracker through the stories behind David’s 3 disc release Fathers, Sons and Brothers and how artists survive the modern music economy. Songwriter rights, road-tested bands, or why records still matter. Read it here.

David Lowery toured this year with a mix of shows celebrating the 40th anniversary of Camper Van Beethoven’s debut, Telephone Free Landslide Victory, duo and band gigs with Cracker, as well as solo dates promoting his recently-released Fathers, Sons and Brothers.

Fathers, the 28-track musical memoir of Lowery’s personal life explored childhood memories, drugs at Disneyland and broken relationships. Of course, it tackles his lengthy career as an indie and major label artist who catalog highlights include the alt-rock classic “Take the Skinheads Bowling” and commercial breakthrough of “Teen Angst” and “Low.” The album works as a selection of songs that encapsulate much of his musical history— folk, country and rock—as well as an illuminating narrative that relates the ups, downs, tenacity, reflection and resolve of more than four decades as a musician.

9/18/25: Save the Date! @ArtistRights Institute and American University Kogod School to host Artist Rights Roundtable on AI and Copyright Sept. 18 in Washington, DC

🎙️ Artist Rights Roundtable on AI and Copyright:  Coffee with Humans and the Machines            

📍 Butler Board Room, Bender Arena, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington D.C. 20016 | 🗓️ September 18, 2025 | 🕗 8:00 a.m. – 12:00 noon

Hosted by the Artist Rights Institute & American University’s Kogod School of Business, Entertainment Business Program

🔹 Overview:

Join the Artist Rights Institute (ARI) and Kogod’s Entertainment Business Program for a timely morning roundtable on AI and copyright from the artist’s perspective. We’ll explore how emerging artificial intelligence technologies challenge authorship, licensing, and the creative economy — and what courts, lawmakers, and creators are doing in response.

☕ Coffee served starting at 8:00 a.m.
🧠 Program begins at 8:50 a.m.
🕛 Concludes by 12:00 noon — you’ll be free to have lunch with your clone.

🗂️ Program:

8:00–8:50 a.m. – Registration and Coffee

8:50–9:00 a.m. – Introductory Remarks by Dean David Marchick and ARI Director Chris Castle

9:00–10:00 a.m. – Topic 1: AI Provenance Is the Cornerstone of Legitimate AI Licensing:

Speakers:
Dr. Moiya McTier Human Artistry Campaign
Ryan Lehnning, Assistant General Counsel, International at SoundExchange
The Chatbot
Moderator Chris Castle, Artist Rights Institute

10:10–10:30 a.m. – Briefing: Current AI Litigation, Kevin Madigan, Senior Vice President, Policy and Government Affairs, Copyright Alliance

10:30–11:30 a.m. – Topic 2: Ask the AI: Can Integrity and Innovation Survive Without Artist Consent?

Speakers:
Erin McAnally, Executive Director, Songwriters of North America
Dr. Richard James Burgess, CEO A2IM
Dr. David C. Lowery, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia.

Moderator: Linda Bloss Baum, Director Business and Entertainment Program, Kogod School of Business

11:40–12:00 p.m. – Briefing: US and International AI Legislation

🎟️ Admission:

Free and open to the public. Registration required at Eventbrite. Seating is limited.

🔗 Stay Updated:

Watch Eventbrite, this space and visit ArtistRightsInstitute.org for updates and speaker announcements.

хулиган: Love to Anastasia Dyudyaeva and Alexander Dotsenko

In July 2024, a military court in Saint Petersburg convicted Russian artists Anastasia Dyudyaeva and her husband Alexander Dotsenko on charges of “public calls for terrorism” after they placed anti-war messages—some in Ukrainian, one reading “Putin to the gallows”—on napkins or postcards in a Lenta supermarket. Dyudyaeva received a 3½-year sentence; Dotsenko, three years. They denied wrongdoing, asserting their creative expression was mischaracterized. Their home, which had hosted anti-war exhibitions, was searched, and they were added to Russia’s registry of “terrorists and extremists.” 

Read about it in the Art Newspaper

@ArtistRights Newsletter 8/18/25: From Jimmy Lai’s show trial in Hong Kong to the redesignation fight over the Mechanical Licensing Collective, this week’s stories spotlight artist rights, ticketing reform, AI scraping, and SoundExchange’s battle with SiriusXM.

Save the Date! September 18 Artist Rights Roundtable in Washington produced by Artist Rights Institute/American University Kogod Business & Entertainment Program. Details at this link!

Artist Rights

JIMMY LAI’S ORDEAL: A SHOW TRIAL THAT SHOULD SHAME THE WORLD (MusicTechPolicy/Chris Castle)

Redesignation of the Mechanical Licensing Collective

Ex Parte Review of the MLC by the Digital Licensee Coordinator

Ticketing

StubHub Updates IPO Filing Showing Growing Losses Despite Revenue Gain (MusicBusinessWorldwide/Mandy Dalugdug)

Lewis Capaldi Concert Becomes Latest Ground Zero for Ticket Scalpers (Digital Music News/Ashley King)

Who’s Really Fighting for Fans? Chris Castle’s Comment in the DOJ/FTC Ticketing Consultation (Artist Rights Watch)

Artificial Intelligence

MUSIC PUBLISHERS ALLEGE ANTHROPIC USED BITTORRENT TO PIRATE COPYRIGHTED LYRICS(MusicBusinessWorldwide/Daniel Tencer)

AI Weather Image Piracy Puts Storm Chasers, All Americans at Risk (Washington Times/Brandon Clemen)

TikTok After Xi’s Qiushi Article: Why China’s Security Laws Are the Whole Ballgame (MusicTechSolutions/Chris Castle)

Reddit Will Block the Internet Archive (to stop AI scraping) (The Verge/Jay Peters) 

SHILLING LIKE IT’S 1999: ARS, ANTHROPIC, AND THE INTERNET OF OTHER PEOPLE’S THINGS(MusicTechPolicy/Chris Castle)

SoundExchange v. SiriusXM

SOUNDEXCHANGE SLAMS JUDGE’S RULING IN SIRIUSXM CASE AS ‘ENTIRELY WRONG ON THE LAW’(MusicBusinessWorldwide/Mandy Dalugdug)

PINKERTONS REDUX: ANTI-LABOR NEW YORK COURT ATTEMPTS TO CUT OFF LITIGATION BY SOUNDEXCHANGE AGAINST SIRIUS/PANDORA (MusicTechPolicy/Chris Castle)

@ArtistRights Newsletter 8/11/25: @DavidCLowery on Streaming, SX v. Sirius, AI the Cult and “Dual Use AI” Culture is Upstream of War

Save the Date! September 18 Artist Rights Roundtable in Washington produced by Artist Rights Institute/American University Kogod Business & Entertainment Program. Details at this link!

Artist Rights Institute logo - Artist Rights Weekly newsletter

Save the Date! September 18 Artist Rights Roundtable in Washington produced by Artist Rights Institute/American University Kogod Business & Entertainment Program. Details at this link!

Streaming Economics

@nickgillespie and @davidclowery: Streaming is a Regulated Monopoly (Reason Magazine/Nick Gillespie)

Spotify’s Royalty Threshold Is Conscious Parallelism Reshaping the Music Business—But Not in a Good Way (The Trichordist/Chris Castle)

SoundExchange v. SiriusXM

Did the Court Misread Congress? Rethinking SoundExchange v. SiriusXM Through the Lens of Legislative Design

Copyright Terminations Vetter v. Resnik

Controversial ruling on US termination right fulfills the intention of Congress, say creators (Complete Music Update/Chris Cooke)

Amicus Brief Supporting Cyril Vetter of Artist Rights Institute (David Lowery, Nikki Rowling), Blake Morgan, Abby North, and Angela Rose White (Chris Castle)

Cult of the AI Singularity

AI Frontier Labs and the Singularity as a Modern Prophetic Cult (MusicTech.Solutions/Chris Castle)

AI Czar David Sacks Shortcut to Nowhere: How the Seven Deadly Since Keep Him From Licensing Solutions

Dual Use AI

America Isn’t Ready for the Wars of the Future (Foreign Affairs/GEN Mark Milley and Eric Schmidt)

Spotify CEO Daniel Ek Named Chairman of Military AI Firm Following 600M Investment (Playy Magazine)

Eric Schmidt Is Building the Perfect AI War-Fighting Machine (Wired/Will Knight)

Souls for Sale: The Long Con Behind AI Weapons and Cultural Complicity (MusicTechPolicy/Chris Castle)

Eric Schmidt-led panel pushing for new defense experimentation unit to drive military adoption of generative AI(Defense Scoop/Brandi Vincent)

The Lords of War: Daniel Ek, Eric Schmidt and the Militarization of Tech (MusicTechPolicy/Chris Castle)

Who’s Really Fighting for Fans? Georgia Music Partners Comment in the DOJ/FTC Ticketing Consultation

The Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission were directed by President Trump to conduct an investigation into ticket scalping pursuant to Executive Order 14254 “Combating Unfair Practices in the Live Entertainment Market.”

This led directly to both agencies inviting public comments on the state of the live event ticketing market—an industry riddled with speculation, opacity, and middlemen who seem to make money without ever attending a show. Over 4000 artists, fans, economists, state attorneys general, and industry veterans all weighed in. And the record reveals something important particularly regarding resellers: there’s a rising consensus that the resellers are engaged in some really shady practices designed for one purpose–to extract as much money as possible from fans and artists without regard to the damage it does to the entire artist-fan relationship.

Today we’re posting Georgia Music Partners’ comment that highlights how unchecked secondary ticketing practices—particularly speculative ticket listings, bot-driven price inflation, deceptive branding, and the resale of restricted tickets—are systematically dismantling the live music ecosystem. These practices strip artists of control, mislead fans, and commoditize the artist-fan relationship for the sole benefit of resellers. The comment urges the DOJ and FTC to treat these behaviors as unfair and deceptive trade practices, enforce the BOTS Act, and distinguish reseller abuse from the separate issues posed by Live Nation case, emphasizing that the artist’s intent and trust with fans must be protected.