Leadership Limbo at the Library of Congress; Library Journal, May 23, 2025

 Hallie Rich, Library Journal; Leadership Limbo at the Library of Congress

"REMAINING NONPARTISAN

According to reporting across major media outlets, staff continue to await guidance from the congressional committees charged with LoC oversight—and questions over the future of the Library as a nonpartisan legislative branch agency hang in the balance. The Congressional Research Service (CRS), the research arm of the Library that works exclusively for members of Congress, provides confidential policy and legal analysis to lawmakers and staff of both chambers, regardless of party affiliation...

WILL CONGRESS ACT?

Politico reported on May 21 that Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-ME) “thinks Congress needs to take charge in naming the heads of major legislative branch agencies, including the Library of Congress and Government Accountability Office.” Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) recommended modifying the process for appointing the Librarian of Congress, citing legislation she wrote that removed presidential involvement in appointing the architect of the Capitol. “Just like we changed the rules with architect the Capitol, we should change them here,” she told reporters.

Legislation that would grant appointment authority for the Librarian of Congress, the leader of a legislative branch agency, exclusively to Congress is one potential path forward.

Library professionals who are concerned about the independence of the Library of Congress should "reach out to your member of Congress,” says one source who spoke on the condition of anonymity, “and do so quickly.” The White House’s effort to install new leadership at the Library was staved off because staff are awaiting direction from Congress.

The Librarian of Congress is not appointed at the sole discretion of the president—an appointment requires Senate confirmation. According to reporting by The New York Times, LoC staff are currently following internal procedures by keeping Newlen in charge, but more permanent answers to questions about the future of the Library as a nonpartisan legislative branch agency appear to lie, at this time, with members of Congress."

US Copyright Office director sues Trump administration over firing; Reuters, May 22, 2025

 Blake Brittain, Reuters; US Copyright Office director sues Trump administration over firing

"The U.S. Copyright Office director fired by the Trump administration sued President Donald Trump and other government officials on Thursday, arguing her firing was unconstitutional and should not be allowed to take effect.

Shira Perlmutter said in the lawsuit that her termination by email on May 10 was "blatantly unlawful," and that only the U.S. Congress can remove her from office."

Congress Must Change Copyright Law for AI | Opinion; Newsweek, January 16, 2025

Nicholas Creel  Assistant Professor of Business Law, Georgia College and State University , Newsweek; Congress Must Change Copyright Law for AI | Opinion

"Luckily, the Constitution points the way forward. In Article I, Section 8, Congress is explicitly empowered "to promote the Progress of Science" through copyright law. That is to say, the power to create copyrights isn't just about protecting content creators, it's also about advancing human knowledge and innovation.

When the Founders gave Congress this power, they couldn't have imagined artificial intelligence, but they clearly understood that intellectual property laws would need to evolve to promote scientific progress. Congress therefore not only has the authority to adapt copyright law for the AI age, it has the duty to ensure our intellectual property framework promotes rather than hinders technological progress.

Consider what's at risk with inaction...

While American companies are struggling with copyright constraints, China is racing ahead with AI development, unencumbered by such concerns. The Chinese Communist Party has made it clear that they view AI supremacy as a key strategic goal, and they're not going to let intellectual property rights stand in their way.

The choice before us is clear, we can either reform our copyright laws to enable responsible AI development at home or we can watch as the future of AI is shaped by authoritarian powers abroad. The cost of inaction isn't just measured in lost innovation or economic opportunity, it is measured in our diminishing ability to ensure AI develops in alignment with democratic values and a respect for human rights.

The ideal solution here isn't to abandon copyright protection entirely, but to craft a careful exemption for AI training. This could even include provisions for compensating content creators through a mandated licensing framework or revenue-sharing system, ensuring that AI companies can access the data they need while creators can still benefit from and be credited for their work's use in training these models.

Critics will argue that this represents a taking from creators for the benefit of tech companies, but this misses the broader picture. The benefits of AI development flow not just to tech companies but to society as a whole. We should recognize that allowing AI models to learn from human knowledge serves a crucial public good, one we're at risk of losing if Congress doesn't act."

We Stood Up for Access to the Law and Congress Listened: 2024 in Review; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), December 25, 2024

KATHARINE TRENDACOSTA , Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); We Stood Up for Access to the Law and Congress Listened: 2024 in Review

"Because you wrote in, because experts sent letters explaining the problems, enough members of Congress recognized that Pro Codes is not uncontroversial. It is not a small deal to allow industry giants to own parts of the law."

Fate of AI and Fair Use Copyright Report Will Depend on Judges; Bloomberg Law, November 26, 2024

Jorja Siemons , Bloomberg Law; Fate of AI and Fair Use Copyright Report Will Depend on Judges

"Federal courts—not the US Copyright Office—will have the final say on implementing any recommendations from the office’s forthcoming report on the fair use ramifications of training AI on protected works...

Judges across the country are presiding over roughly three dozen lawsuits against OpenAI Inc., Microsoft Corp., Meta Platforms Inc., Anthropic PBC, and other AI companies. How they apply that framework as they wrestle with novel legal questions remains to be seen—and it may be Congress that benefits the most from the Copyright Office’s analysis."

Congress Explores AI and Copyright Law; The Federalist Society, April 16, 2024

Lynn White, The Federalist Society; Congress Explores AI and Copyright Law

"Interest in artificial intelligence (AI) has surged in the 118th Congress. There have been several hearings on a range of topics related to AI, including how federal agencies are using it and general principles for regulating its use. The House Committee on Judiciary, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, has held a series of hearings related to AI and Intellectual Property...

Members of the committee seemed interested in the content of the hearing and expressed appreciation for the bi-partisan approach used to explore the issue of AI and intellectual property. Chairman Issa noted that this hearing was just the first of many. He further stated that he believes that Congress will find some middle ground that respects existing copyright law but allows generative AI to continue to grow. Over the next few blog posts, we will summarize this series of hearings and highlight the issues the witnesses and members of Congress discussed."

New bill would force AI companies to reveal use of copyrighted art; The Guardian, April 9, 2024

Nick Robins-Early, The Guardian ; New bill would force AI companies to reveal use of copyrighted art

"A bill introduced in the US Congress on Tuesday intends to force artificial intelligence companies to reveal the copyrighted material they use to make their generative AI models. The legislation adds to a growing number of attempts from lawmakers, news outlets and artists to establish how AI firms use creative works like songs, visual art, books and movies to train their software–and whether those companies are illegally building their tools off copyrighted content.

The California Democratic congressman Adam Schiff introduced the bill, the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act, which would require that AI companies submit any copyrighted works in their training datasets to the Register of Copyrights before releasing new generative AI systems, which create text, images, music or video in response to users’ prompts. The bill would need companies to file such documents at least 30 days before publicly debuting their AI tools, or face a financial penalty. Such datasets encompass billions of lines of text and images or millions of hours of music and movies."

The fingerprints on a letter to Congress about AI; Politico, October 23, 2023

BRENDAN BORDELON, Politico; The fingerprints on a letter to Congress about AI

"The message in the open letter sent to Congress on Sept. 11 was clear: Don’t put new copyright regulations on artificial intelligence systems.

The letter’s signatories were real players, a broad coalition of think tanks, professors and civil-society groups with a stake in the growing debate about AI and copyright in Washington.

Undisclosed, however, were the fingerprints of Sy Damle, a tech-friendly Washington lawyer and former government official who works for top firms in the industry — including OpenAI, one of the top developers of cutting-edge AI models. Damle is currently representing OpenAI in ongoing copyright lawsuits...

The effort by an OpenAI lawyer to covertly sway Congress against new laws on AI and copyright comes in the midst of an escalating influence campaign — tied to OpenAI and other top AI firms — that critics fear is shifting Washington’s attention away from current AI harms and toward existential threats posed by future AI systems...

Many of the points made in the September letter echo those made recently by Damle in other venues, including an argument comparing the rise of AI to the invention of photography."

Film and music industries on edge: AI's growing influence stirs fear of job displacement, copyright issues; KATU2ABC, August 8, 2023

KONNER MCINTIRE and JANAE BOWENS , KATU2ABC; Film and music industries on edge: AI's growing influence stirs fear of job displacement, copyright issues

"Currently, the Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act provides some protection to musicians. It was made law in 2018 and helps to ensure musicians are fairly compensated by publishers.

The law directly addresses piracy which has cost artists billions of dollars.

Five years later, Congressional leaders, including Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.,who serves as the Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, are concerned the law will not protect musicians against AI.

“For Congress, we’re now looking at old challenges with new dangers, including the ever-present threat of piracy as well as artificial intelligence, which pose still unknown questions for intellectual property protection efforts even as they open doors to a new world of technological capability that is, at present, limitless,” the congressman recently wrote in an op-ed.“If we don’t get AI right, it could very well render not only the Music Modernization Act obsolete – but also the policy choices we make next.”"

Five Takeaways From the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property’s AI and Copyright Hearing; JD Supra, July 21, 2023

Nathaniel Bach, Monica Kulkarni, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP , JD Supra; Five Takeaways From the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property’s AI and Copyright Hearing

"On July 12, 2023, the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Intellectual Property held its second hearing on artificial intelligence (AI) and intellectual property (IP). The first hearing, held on June 7, 2023, focused on AI’s implications for patent law, while this second hearing centered on copyright issues. Hearing participants, both senators and witnesses, seemed to recognize that the industry needs to strike a balance between promoting AI innovation and protecting creators’ rights, particularly in the context of training generative AI models using data gathered from the Internet. While opinions on the means to achieve that end certainly differed across witnesses—who ranged from the head of public policy at Stability AI to a concept artist—the general consensus was that more clarity on the federal level regarding how to protect creators’ rights would be beneficial to stakeholders across the board...

Accordingly, the senators focused their questioning on mainly five topics, providing a glimpse of what potential federal legislation could look like:..."

Music & Tech Executives Testify on Artificial Intelligence & Copyright; C-Span, July 12, 2023

C-Span; Music & Tech Executives Testify on Artificial Intelligence & Copyright

"Music industry and tech company executives as well as a visual artist and a law professor testified on artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on copyright and intellectual property before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee. Topics included publicity and fair use of content, an opt-out process for creators, notating content that has been created using AI, deep fake technology, and ways that Congress can help protect intellectual property."

Does Section 230 cover artificial intelligence? Experts are not sure; ABC7, July 11, 2023

 GRAYCE MCCORMICK , ABC7; Does Section 230 cover artificial intelligence? Experts are not sure

"Burk said the decision over whether Section 230 covers generative AI boils down to whether the product is an informational product or a product with manufacturer liability...

It’s hard for us to imagine what social media would be like today without the protection of Section 230, or if it would have even been possible to develop without the risk of lawsuits.

On the other hand, there could be benefits to dictating how it’s developed, considering certain social media platforms’ documented harms.

“If you can identify discrete problems and you have an idea of the outcome that you would like to have or the outcomes you’re worried about, you can actually shape the development of technology into a socially desirable path,” Burk said. He cited products like automobiles and pharmaceuticals, which are now manufactured to be as safe as possible."

Three things to know about how the US Congress might regulate AI; MIT Technology Review, July 3, 2023

 Tate Ryan-Mosley, MIT Technology Review ; Three things to know about how the US Congress might regulate AI

"Here are three key themes in all this chatter that you should know to help you understand where US AI legislation could be going."

Senate aims to navigate conflict between copyright and training AI; Washington Examiner, June 7, 2023

Christopher Hutton, Washington Examiner ; Senate aims to navigate conflict between copyright and training AI

"The Senate is set this week to begin addressing the tension between using images and data to train artificial intelligence and existing copyright law...

The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled on Wednesday to host the first of several hearings on AI and intellectual property. This one will deal with "Patents, Innovation, and Competition." The hearing will feature professors from the University of California, Los Angeles and Laura Sheridan, Google's head of patent policy."

Hawley to introduce legislation targeting Disney copyright protections; Washington Examiner, May 2, 2022

 Zachary Halaschak, Washington Examiner ; Hawley to introduce legislation targeting Disney copyright protections

"The copyright on Disney’s classic Steamboat Willie Mickey Mouse, the first iteration of the character, is set to expire at the end of 2023, and Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) recently wrote to Disney CEO Bob Chapek telling him that he and some other GOP lawmakers oppose “further extensions applicable” to the company’s copyrights. Banks argued those should become public domain. 

Republicans in both Florida and Washington, D.C., have been upset about Disney’s public lobbying against the Florida legislation, which is called the Parental Rights in Education bill but has been branded the “Don't Say Gay” bill by critics. The legislation bans classroom instruction of sexual orientation and gender identity through the third grade. 

Disney has successfully lobbied for copyright extensions in the past. Disney pushed for the Copyright Act of 1976 and then worked to get the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 signed into law. Detractors of the latter bill had branded it the “Mickey Mouse Protection Act.”...

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) also recently tweeted, “Next year, the woke Disney lobbyists will ask Congress to extend Micky Mouse’s trademark. I think not.”"

U.S. Copyright Office: DMCA Is “Tilted Askew,” Recommends Remedies for Rightsholders; JDSupra, August 7, 2020

Aylin Kuzucan, Fenwick & West LLP, JDSupra; U.S. Copyright Office: DMCA Is “Tilted Askew,” Recommends Remedies for Rightsholders

"On May 21, 2020, the U.S. Copyright Office released its first full report—based on 92,000 written comments, five roundtables and decades of case law—on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 512). The analysis was intended to determine whether the DMCA’s safe harbor provisions effectively balanced the needs of online service providers and rightsholders. The Copyright Office concluded that the balance is “tilted askew,” with largely ineffective copyright infringement protections for rightsholders...

Going forward, the Copyright Office plans to post a new website—copyright.gov/DMCA—with several educational and practical elements, including model takedown notices and counter-notices. In addition, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Intellectual Property plans to draft changes to the DMCA by the end of 2020. Any changes made will be critical for the copyright community to monitor closely."

CCC Salutes and Celebrates the US Copyright Office’s 150th Anniversary; Copyright Clearance Center, August 5, 2020

Copyright Clearance Center;

CCC Salutes and Celebrates the US Copyright Office’s 150th Anniversary

"CCC salutes and celebrates the historic milestone passed recently by the US Copyright Office: its 150th year of continuous operation...

In 1906, Mark Twain addressed Congress, appearing in his famous white suit for the first time, in pursuit of additional copyright protection for authors (which did not actually occur until 1976): 

“I am interested particularly and especially in the part of the bill which concerns my trade. I like that extension of copyright life to the author’s life and fifty years afterward. I think that would satisfy any reasonable author, because it would take care of his children. Let the grand-children take care of themselves. That would take care of my daughters, and after that I am not particular. I shall then have long been out of this struggle, independent of it, indifferent to it.”"
 

Targeting intellectual theft; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, July 11, 2020

The Editorial Board;

Targeting intellectual theft

A new bipartisan bill will help the U.S. clamp down on the theft of American innovations

"Many American innovations and technological advancements originate with the work of academics and researchers at U.S. colleges and universities. This, unfortunately, has made those university-backed research projects a target for foreign operatives seeking to steal American intellectual property in recent decades."

[Video] Is the DMCA's Notice-and-Takedown System Working in the 21st Century?; June 2, 2020, Subcommittee Hearing, Committee on the Judiciary

[Video] Subcommittee Hearing, Committee on the Judiciary; Is the DMCA's Notice-and-Takedown System Working in the 21st Century?

Senators introduce Protecting American Intellectual Property Act; IT Pro, June 12, 2020

Sarah Brennan,

IT Pro

; Senators introduce Protecting American Intellectual Property Act

"U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Ben Sasse (R-NE) proposed bipartisan legislation mandating strong economic penalties on firms and individuals involved in stealing American intellectual property. In an interview with Reuters, Van Hollen said the Protecting American Intellectual Property Act is a “direct approach” to battling China’s use of illicit methods for obtaining technological advances made in the U.S."