Hollywood Gets a Major Boost From a Republican Senator in the Fight Over AI Copyright
Media and entertainment personalities worried that their work is being unlawfully fed into AI copyright models gained a prominent ally Wednesday when Missouri Senator Josh Hawley went after a YouTube executive for how Google trains its models in a tense Capitol Hill session.
'That seems like a big problem to me,' Hawley said in a Judiciary subcommittee hearing after the executive, Music Policy chief Suzana Carlos, had explained that videos uploaded to the site are used to train Gemini and other Google AI products for any user agreeing to the terms of service, a requirement for uploading. 'That seems like a huge, huge problem to me. And the fact that YouTube is monetizing these kinds of videos seems like a huge problem to me.'
More from The Hollywood Reporter
Streaming Hits Another High in April, Cable and Broadcast Rise Too
YouTube Stars Make the Case for Why Their Shows Are Emmy-Worthy: "That's the Future"
YouTube Closes TV's Upfront Week With Creators, Confidence and Lady Gaga
Hawley said that Congress and tech companies needed to find ways to 'give individuals powerful enforceable rights and their image and their property and their lives back again.'
The Republican lawmaker was speaking at a hearing for the No Fakes Act, where earlier in the session Carlos, country star Martina McBride and RIAA chief executive Mitch Glazier had been among those testifying on behalf of the bill, which aims to impose limits on how users might create AI versions of an artist or other person's face or voice. The previous two iterations of the bill had not gained enough support to pass, but backers hope YouTube coming aboard, as it recently did, could spell the difference.
But it was Hawley's remarks on an only partly-related issue that were among the most notable at the hearing. AI copyright has been a key battle area between media and tech companies, with The New York Times currently suing OpenAI over how models are trained on its articles in a closely watched case for anyone who creates or holds intellectual property. Tech companies need the content company's material to build their models, which rely on tens of thousands of news stories, images, videos, songs and other content to generate their output.
Trump's removal of the head of the U.S. Copyright Office earlier this month after she expressed hesitation that what OpenAI and others were doing is legal has further stirred concern that copyrighted material is being used unlawfully without artists' and companies' consent.
Hawley has previously positioned himself as an anti Big Tech-populist, going after Meta for a host of alleged missteps and, more specifically on AI, urging the Labor Department to protect workers in the wake of AI shifts and criticizing OpenAI for its accelerationism.
But Wednesday marks some of his strongest public words yet on the copyright issue, and makes the Republican lawmaker something of a strange bedfellow to SAG-AFTRA, Justine Bateman, Hollywood artist Reid Southen, The New York Times and others in creative fields who have raised alarm bells that a business is being built on the backs of others' work without compensation.
'We've got to do more. YouTube is I'm sure making billions of dollars off this,' Hawley said Wednesday. 'The people losing are the artists and creators and the teenagers whose lives are upended.' (The last point was a reference to deepfakes involving bullying and non-consensual images, which Hawley also said YouTube needs to police harder.)
For the most part tech companies have said the material they train their models on is allowed under laws of fair use. Carlos repeated several times during Hawley's questioning that Google trains its models on videos uploaded to YouTube. 'We do share data in accordance with our agreements,' she said.
Hawley said he believed that none of the major tech companies have sufficiently explained how they're protecting a creator's copyright and that more of them need to answer for their training actions.
Hawley criticized those firms too. 'I'm glad you're here today,' he told Carlos. 'I wish there were more tech companies here today.'
Best of The Hollywood Reporter
Most Anticipated Concert Tours of 2025: Beyoncé, Billie Eilish, Kendrick Lamar & SZA, Sabrina Carpenter and More
Hollywood's Most Notable Deaths of 2025
Hollywood's Highest-Profile Harris Endorsements: Taylor Swift, George Clooney, Bruce Springsteen and More
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senate Republicans revise ban on state AI regulations in bid to preserve controversial provision
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans have made changes to their party's sweeping tax bill in hopes of preserving a new policy that would prevent states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade. In legislative text unveiled Thursday night, Senate Republicans proposed denying states federal funding for broadband projects if they regulate AI. That's a change from a provision in the House-passed version of the tax overhaul that simply banned any current or future AI regulations by the states for 10 years. 'These provisions fulfill the mandate given to President Trump and Congressional Republicans by the voters: to unleash America's full economic potential and keep her safe from enemies,' Sen. Ted Cruz, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, said in a statement announcing the changes. The proposed ban has angered state lawmakers in Democratic and Republican-led states and alarmed some digital safety advocates concerned about how AI will develop as the technology rapidly advances. But leading AI executives, including OpenAI's Sam Altman, have made the case to senators that a 'patchwork' of state AI regulations would cripple innovation. Some House Republicans are also uneasy with the provision. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., came out against the AI regulatory moratorium in the House bill after voting for it. She said she had not read that section of the bill. 'We should be reducing federal power and preserving state power. Not the other way around,' Greene wrote on social media. Senate Republicans made their change in an attempt to follow the special process being used to pass the tax bill with a simple majority vote. To comply with those rules, any provision needs to deal primarily with the federal budget and not government policy. Republican leaders argue, essentially, that by setting conditions for states to receive certain federal appropriations — in this instance, funding for broadband internet infrastructure — they would meet the Senate's standard for using a majority vote. Cruz told reporters Thursday that he will make his case next week to Senate parliamentarian on why the revised ban satisfies the rules. The parliamentarian is the chamber's advisor on its proper rules and procedures. While the parliamentarian's ruling are not binding, senators of both parties have adhered to their findings in the past. Senators generally argue that Congress should take the lead on regulating AI but so far the two parties have been unable to broker a deal that is acceptable to Republicans' and Democrats' divergent concerns. The GOP legislation also includes significant changes to how the federal government auctions commercial spectrum ranges. Those new provisions expand the range of spectrum available for commercial use, an issue that has divided lawmakers over how to balance questions of national security alongside providing telecommunications firms access to more frequencies for commercial wireless use. Senators are aiming to pass the tax package, which extends the 2017 rate cuts and other breaks from President Donald Trump's first term along with new tax breaks and steep cuts to social programs, later this month. Matt Brown, The Associated Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Down Nearly 60%, Should You Buy the Dip on SoundHound AI?
SoundHound AI is growing rapidly, but it's racking up steep losses. Its growing dependence on acquisitions raises a few red flags. A lot of growth has already been baked into its valuations. 10 stocks we like better than SoundHound AI › SoundHound AI (NASDAQ: SOUN), a developer of artificial intelligence (AI)-powered audio recognition tools, saw its stock close at a record high of $24.23 on Dec. 26, 2024. But since then, its stock has declined nearly 60%. Let's see why this hot stock fizzled out -- and if its pullback represents a buying opportunity for long-term investors. SoundHound AI's namesake app identifies songs by listening to several seconds of recorded audio or a few hummed bars. However, most of its growth is fueled by Houndify, its developer platform, which allows businesses to create their own custom voice recognition tools. Houndify powers voice recognition features in restaurant ordering platforms, smart TVs, connected cars, and other devices. It's an appealing option for companies that don't want to send data to Microsoft, Alphabet's Google, or other tech giants that provide their own data-gathering voice recognition services. SoundHound AI initially attracted a lot of attention for three reasons. First, its revenue surged 47% in 2022, rose another 47% in 2023, and jumped 85% in 2024. Second, the booming AI market drove a stampede of bulls to its AI-driven stock. Lastly, the AI chipmaking bellwether Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA) boosted its stake in SoundHound and integrated its voice recognition tools into its Drive platform for connected vehicles. Yet Soundify's stock stumbled for three reasons. First, most of its growth in 2023 and 2024 was driven by acquisitions -- including the restaurant AI company SYNQ3, the online food ordering platform Allset, and the conversational AI company Amelia. That strategy strengthened its position in the restaurant industry, but it also indicated it was running out of room to grow. Second, those acquisitions made it even tougher to break even. Its adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) margins came in at negative 73% last year -- which broadly missed its original target of achieving a positive adjusted EBITDA margin by 2024. Lastly, Nvidia liquidated its entire position in SoundHound AI earlier this year. SoundHound ended 2024 with a backlog of $1.2 billion, and it already serves big automakers like Stellantis, quick-serve restaurants like Chipotle, healthcare institutions like MUSC Health, and tech giants like Tencent. Automakers are adding more voice-activated features to their vehicles, restaurants are using more of its AI tools to process their drive-thru and phone orders, and healthcare institutions are processing more patient requests with Amelia's AI chatbots. SoundHound could still have plenty of room to expand. From 2025 to 2035, the global voice agents market could grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 34.8%, according to market research firm as more companies replace their human workers with AI-powered voice agents. For 2025, SoundHound expects its revenue to surge 97%. From 2024 to 2027, analysts expect its revenue to rise at a CAGR of 48%, from $85 million to $277 million. They also expect it to finally squeeze out a positive adjusted EBITDA of $5 million in 2027. That outlook seems promising, but a lot of its future growth has already been baked into its valuations. With a market cap of $4.1 billion, it already trades at 25.5 times this year's sales. It's also more than doubled its number of shares since it went public by merging with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) just over three years ago, and that dilution will likely continue as it relies on its secondary offerings to raise fresh cash and its stock-based compensation to subsidize its salaries and acquisitions. So while SoundHound AI is still growing rapidly, it hasn't proven that it deserves its premium valuation or that its business model is sustainable. I might nibble on the stock after its recent pullback -- since its core market is still expanding -- but I wouldn't go all in until it meaningfully narrows its losses. Before you buy stock in SoundHound AI, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and SoundHound AI wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $656,825!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $865,550!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 994% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Leo Sun has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tencent. The Motley Fool recommends Stellantis and recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft, short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft, and short June 2025 $55 calls on Chipotle Mexican Grill. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Down Nearly 60%, Should You Buy the Dip on SoundHound AI? was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
YouTube overtakes streaming rivals as the go-to for TV and movies
Gone are the days when YouTube was just for catching up on vlogs or diving into late-night rabbit holes. Today, the platform is staking its claim in TV and film. Why you're catching the 'ick' so easily, according to science Why AI Is Making 1:1 Meetings Irrelevant Where are the wildfires in Canada? Maps pinpoint the location of fires and air-quality threats from smoke According to a new survey conducted by Looper Insights between April 16 and 25, 66% of consumers discover TV or film content via YouTube. For 61%, it's already part of their regular streaming habits, and for 34%, it's a main source for TV and film content, as reported by Media Play News. This shift isn't surprising. In April, the Google-owned platform captured a record 12.4% share of all TV viewing. And it's not just rival streamers who should be concerned. For three consecutive months, YouTube has ranked as the No. 1 distributor of television content, according to Nielsen. Media executives are taking notice. Among the 65 surveyed, 84% view YouTube as a viable platform for launching long-form content, and 30% are actively considering it for upcoming releases. In Q1 2025, more Americans watched YouTube on TV screens than on mobile devices—a first. Meeting audiences in the living room, media companies have begun uploading premium content directly to the platform. Earlier this year, Warner Bros. quietly released more than 30 full-length films on YouTube, free to watch. Yet as YouTube continues its rise, creators face critical decisions. Some, like Ms Rachel, have signed licensing deals with Netflix. MrBeast (aka Jimmy Donaldson), YouTube's most-subscribed creator, brought Beast Games to the small screen via Prime Video. Still, many fans would rather their favorite YouTubers stay where they started. More than half (54%) of respondents said YouTubers feel more authentic and better suited to the platform that launched their careers. Meanwhile, nearly three-quarters (74%) of executives noted that creator-led shows often underperform on platforms like Netflix and Prime, citing poor audience migration and an overreliance on follower counts. The good news: The YouTube takeover is already in full swing—so creators may not need to go anywhere at all. This post originally appeared at to get the Fast Company newsletter:
