On Friday, China urged the US to

Johannesburg mayor Dada Morero told South Africa's Mail & Guardian newspaperHe added the owners of nearly 100 buildings could not be located.

"They have abandoned the buildings," he said, adding some of the owners were from the UK and Germany.But Mabasa and Karberg told the BBC that in such cases compensation would probably still have to be paid for the buildings, though not the land.If the state could not locate the owners, it "must deposit the compensation with the Master of the High Court" in case they returned or could be traced later, they said.

The law is in limbo, as Ramaphosa – about four months after giving his assent to it – has still not set a date for its implementation.Nor is he likely to do so anytime soon, as he would not want to further antagonise Trump while South Africa was trying to negotiate a trade deal with the US.

And on the domestic front, the DA is spearheading opposition to the legislation. It said it wanted a "judicial review" of it, while at the same time it was pressing ahead with court action to challenge the law's constitutionality.

The DA's tough line is in contrast with that of Macpherson, who, a few weeks ago, warned that if the law was struck down in its entirety: "I don't know what's going to come after that.Instead, it is currently stuck in limbo, ping-ponging between the House of Lords and the House of Commons.

The bill states that AI developers should have access to all content unless its individual owners choose to opt out.Nearly 300 members of the House of Lords disagree.

They think AI firms should be forced to disclose which copyrighted material they use to train their tools, with a view to licensing it.Sir Nick Clegg, former president of global affairs at Meta, is among those broadly supportive of the bill, arguing that asking permission from all copyright holders would "kill the AI industry in this country".