Forrester has announced the full agenda for the Technology & Innovation Summit EMEA 2025, providing attendees with a detailed schedule of sessions, discussions, and presentations. The event, which is set to bring together industry leaders, technologists, and innovators, will focus on emerging trends, digital transformation, and the future of technology in the European, Middle Eastern, and African markets. The agenda includes keynote speeches from prominent figures in the tech sector, panel discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and cloud computing, as well as workshops designed to offer practical insights and strategies. Forrester, a leading research and advisory company, has emphasized that the summit will serve as a platform for professionals to exchange ideas, explore new opportunities, and stay ahead of the rapidly evolving tech landscape. The event is expected to attract a wide range of participants, from C-suite executives to IT managers and technology decision-makers. Details about the schedule, speakers, and registration are now available on Forrester's official website, allowing attendees to plan their participation in advance. The summit will take place in 2025 and is part of Forrester's ongoing efforts to support innovation and provide valuable resources to the technology community.

A U.S. federal judge has ruled in favor of AI company Anthropic, finding that training its AI models on legally purchased physical books without authors’ permission qualifies as fair use under copyright law. This landmark decision marks the first time a court has supported the AI industry’s claim that copyrighted works can be used for training large language models (LLMs) without explicit authorization, as long as the use is transformative and limited to training. The case was brought by authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson, who accused Anthropic of using their works without permission to train its Claude AI chatbot. Judge William Alsup of California’s Northern District ruled that Anthropic’s process of buying physical books, dismantling them, and scanning pages to create a digital library for training is a fair use, comparing it to a student learning to write by reading many works rather than copying any single author’s style. However, Alsup also found that Anthropic’s practice of downloading over seven million pirated books from the internet to build a “central library” is not protected by fair use. The company will face a separate trial on this issue, with potential financial penalties. The judge noted that purchasing some pirated books after the fact does not absolve Anthropic of liability. This ruling is a major development for AI companies such as OpenAI, Meta, and Google, which face numerous lawsuits alleging unauthorized use of copyrighted materials for AI training. The fair use doctrine, dating back to 1976, has never been updated to address AI or digital content, leaving courts to interpret its application to new technology. Alsup emphasized the transformative nature of AI training, stating that the AI’s output does not replicate specific authors’ creative expression but rather creates something new based on learning from many sources. However, the decision did not address whether AI-generated content infringes copyright, an issue under consideration in other cases. Anthropic expressed satisfaction with the ruling, saying it aligns with copyright’s goal to foster creativity and scientific progress. The company stressed that its models aim not to replicate or replace works but to “turn a hard corner and create something different.” Despite the partial victory, Anthropic’s legal challenges continue, particularly concerning its use of pirated books. The upcoming trial will determine damages related to these alleged infringements. Founded in 2021 by former OpenAI executives and valued at over $60 billion with Amazon backing, Anthropic promotes AI safety and responsible innovation. Its Claude chatbot, launched in 2023, is trained on millions of books and other materials, including some contested in this lawsuit. The case highlights ongoing tensions between the AI industry’s data needs and copyright holders’ rights, a debate likely to shape the future of AI development and content licensing. Meanwhile, some publishers are exploring licensing agreements with AI firms to legally monetize their works. As AI continues to evolve rapidly, courts worldwide face the challenge of balancing innovation with protecting intellectual property, making this ruling a crucial precedent in AI copyright law.