05
Thu, Mar
78 New Articles

Whether an artificial intelligence model can be trained on media content without infringing copyright is rapidly becoming one of the most pressing questions of the AI-copyright interaction. The recent UK High Court ruling in Getty Images v Stability AI has intensified this debate, drawing global attention to the legal boundaries surrounding the use of copyright-protected media content in the training of generative AI systems. Although the case initially included claims concerning the training and development of Stability AI’s image-generation model, the claimants ultimately abandoned those claims. Thus, despite the ongoing heated debate, the UK High Court did not have the opportunity to address the merits of the AI-copyright interaction issue – whether the collection and internal processing of copyrighted works during training constitute copyright infringement.

As the year is coming to an end and attention naturally shifts to closing the quarter and preparing for the holidays, a sense of uncertainty looms over the announced amendments to the Croatian Employment Act (Amendments). The need for speed is clear – all EU member states, including Croatia, are under an obligation to transpose the Directive 2023/970 (popularly called the “Pay Transparency Directive”) by no later than June 7, 2026. Concerns remain well-founded – at the time of writing, there is still no publicly available information on the workgroup tasked with drafting the Amendments, and given the formal steps ahead, from public consultation to parliamentary adoption, meeting the deadline appears increasingly optimistic.

In recent times, authorities throughout Europe and the rest of the world have been focusing on antitrust violations in the labor market. As a result, in 2024, the EU Commission came out with the policy brief on Antitrust in Labor Markets. Although the cases at the EU level have just started to trickle in, many of the European competition authorities have already dealt with the issues concerning no-poach/non-solicitation agreements, wage-fixing, and, to a smaller extent, information exchange. The Croatian Competition Agency (CCA) is no exception.

Croatia is navigating two notable legal developments at the moment: a partly implemented FDI regime that has slowed non-EU investment activity, and a new zoning proposal that is drawing mixed reactions from the market, while broader economic pressures continue to unfold, according to Ostermann Ivancic Managing Partner Mojmir Ostermann.

In The Corner Office, we ask Managing Partners at law firms across Central and Eastern Europe about their backgrounds, strategies, and responsibilities. This time around, we asked: What is the one most time-consuming administrative task for you as a Managing Partner, and what, if anything, have you done to try to minimize time spent on it?

Karanovic & Partners, working with White & Case, has advised MidEuropa on the sale of regional dairy producer Imlek to a consortium comprising the family holding of entrepreneur and investor Andrej Jovanovic as lead investor and Imlek’s current CEO Bojan Radun. Sijercic & Partners and Ilej & Partners in cooperation with Karanovic & Partners advised MidEuropa as well. Kinstellar advised the buyers.

Gospic Plazina Stojs has advised City of Zagreb-owned public utility company Zagrebacki Holding on a club loan agreement of up to EUR 131 million from Zagrebacka Banka and Erste & Steiermawrkische Bank, to refinance existing debt. Miskovic & Miskovic advised the lenders.

The widespread adoption of generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) in Croatia’s tech, media, and professional services sectors is raising a simple but crucial question: who owns the outputs created by these tools, and what can users legally do with them?