@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)

FTC Cracks Down on Ticket Scalpers in Major BOTS Act Enforcement

The wheels of justice turn slowly, but they do turn.

In what appears to be a response to NITO’s complaint filed last year with FTC, pressure from Senator Marsha Blackburn and President Trump’s executive order on ticket scalping, Hypebot reports that the Federal Trade Commission is going after large-scale ticket resellers for violating the Better Online Ticket Sales (BOTS) Act (authored by Senators Blackburn and Richard Blumenthal). 

The enforcement action seeks tens of millions of dollars in damages and signals that federal regulators are finally prepared to tackle the systemic abuse of automated tools and deceptive practices in the live event ticketing market.

According to Hypebot, the FTC alleges that the companies used bots and a web of pseudonymous accounts to bypass ticket purchasing limits—snagging prime seats to high-demand concerts and reselling them at inflated prices on platforms like StubHub and SeatGeek. The case represents one of the largest BOTS Act enforcement efforts to date. 

“The FTC is finally doing what artists, managers, and fans have been asking for: holding scalpers accountable,” said Randy Nichols, artist manager for Underoath and advocate for ticketing reform. “This sends a message to bad actors that the days of unchecked resale are numbered.”

As Hypebot reports, this enforcement may just be the beginning. The case is likely to test the limits of the BOTS Act and could set new precedent for what counts as deceptive or unfair conduct in the ticket resale market—even when bots aren’t directly involved.

Read the full story via HypebotFTC Goes After Ticket Scalpers, Seeks Tens of Millions in Damages

@FTC to AI (and other) Companies: Quietly Changing Your Terms of Service Could Be Unfair or Deceptive

An important position paper from the Federal Trade Commission about AI:

You may have heard that “data is the new oil”—in other words, data is the critical raw material that drives innovation in tech and business, and like oil, it must be collected at a massive scale and then refined in order to be useful. And there is perhaps no data refinery as large-capacity and as data-hungry as AI. 

Companies developing AI products, as we have noted, possess a continuous appetite for more and newer data, and they may find that the readiest source of crude data are their own userbases. But many of these companies also have privacy and data security policies in place to protect users’ information. These companies now face a potential conflict of interest: they have powerful business incentives to turn the abundant flow of user data into more fuel for their AI products, but they also have existing commitments to protect their users’ privacy….

It may be unfair or deceptive for a company to adopt more permissive data practices—for example, to start sharing consumers’ data with third parties or using that data for AI training—and to only inform consumers of this change through a surreptitious, retroactive amendment to its terms of service or privacy policy. (emphasis in original)…

The FTC will continue to bring actions against companies that engage in unfair or deceptive practices—including those that try to switch up the “rules of the game” on consumers by surreptitiously re-writing their privacy policies or terms of service to allow themselves free rein to use consumer data for product development. Ultimately, there’s nothing intelligent about obtaining artificial consent.

Read the post on FTC