table of contents
1. The bill would impose civil penalties on users of copyrighted works for failing to disclose them
Second, the debate over the fair use of generative AI platforms is heating up
The Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act will impose a civil penalty of at least $5,000 on anyone who creates or alters a training dataset containing copyrighted works without disclosing the identity of those works to the Copyright Registry.
On April 9, 2024, U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff introduced the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act of 2024 to the U.S. House of Representatives, which would require generative AI platforms to disclose their use of copyrighted works when training AI models, with retroactive effect and will apply to previously released generative AI systems.
1. The bill would impose civil penalties on users of copyrighted works for failing to disclose them
Once the draft law goes into effect, the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act will impose a civil penalty of at least $5,000 on anyone who creates or alters a training dataset containing copyrighted works without disclosing the identity of those works to the Copyright Registry. They will be required to submit to the Register a "sufficiently detailed summary" of any copyrighted work used to create or alter the dataset, as well as a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) address of the training dataset that is publicly available online at the time the notice is published.
The disclosure requirements and other provisions of the Act will go into effect 180 days after the Act becomes U.S. law. At that time, providers of generative AI platforms that publicly publish their AI systems trained with copyrighted content will have 30 days to submit the required notices to the Copyright Registry to avoid civil penalties under the law. After the Act comes into force, anyone who publishes a generative AI system trained with copyrighted content will also have 30 days from the date of public publication to report to the Registry on the use of copyrighted content. The bill also directs the Register to publish regulations implementing copyright claims requirements and to maintain an online public database containing the substance of every notice filed with the Register.
Rep. Schiff said, "AI has the devastating potential to transform our economies, political systems, and daily lives. We must balance the enormous potential of AI with the critical need for ethics and protection. My Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act is a critical step in this direction. It supports innovation while safeguarding the rights and contributions of creators, ensuring that they know when their work will contribute to AI training datasets. It's about respecting creativity in the age of AI and combining technological progress with equity. ”
Last year, both houses of Congress held a series of public hearings to address issues related to the impact of generative AI systems on the protection of U.S. copyright law. Last May, the House Subcommittee on Intellectual Property hosted several creative professionals, including Ashley Irwin, president of the Society of Composers and Authors, and Jeffrey Sedik, president and CEO of the PLUS Alliance of Visual Artists, who expressed concerns about the unauthorized use of their work. Last July, the Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property heard testimony from visual artist advocate Kayla Ortiz, who has also created artwork for several Marvel films (Marvel films, a series of films based on Marvel Comics characters and plots --- editor's note). Ortiz noted that many professionals in the creative world have abandoned the use of generative AI platforms because of their heavy use of copyrighted data without the author's authorization.
Second, the debate over the fair use of generative AI platforms is heating up
This legislation could reverse the scales of the long-running tug-of-war around "fair use." OpenAI, which developed GPT-4 and DALL-E, argued in a document submitted to the UK government in early 2024 that "legally, copyright law does not prohibit AI learning." OpenAI also said in its submission that its AI tools would not work if they did not have access to copyrighted works. The AI company argues that "our tools won't work if we don't have access to copyrighted works," which could hinder the development of AI technology.
The controversy has spilled over into the courts as high-profile figures such as Sarah Silverman and even the New York Times have filed copyright infringement charges against these AI companies.
While the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act itself does not affect the application of the fair use doctrine in the context of generative AI, the disagreement between attorneys who previously represented the U.S. Copyright Office may indicate that the agencies responsible for enforcing the Act's provisions have a different view of copyright liability. Sy Damle, the former general counsel of the Copyright Office who served under Presidents Obama and Trump, testified at a hearing before the House Intellectual Property Subcommittee last May that he likened the process of training generative AI platforms to human education. This drew a response from Jon Baumgarten, the former general counsel of the Copyright Office under President Ford, who wrote to the House Intellectual Property Subcommittee stating that Damler's view that the fair use doctrine applies "may be fundamentally wrong."
Schiff's introduction to the generative AI bill comes days after the New York Times published a story detailing possible illegal business activities by major tech companies, including Google and Meta, when training their own generative AI platforms. Not only has the unauthorized use of copyrighted content to train generative AI models sparked multiple lawsuits in U.S. District Court, but French regulators recently fined Google €250 million ($271 million) for violating a June 2022 settlement agreement for Google's unauthorized use of copyrighted content.
Schiff's Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act has garnered broad support from nearly two dozen organizations representing the interests of creators:
Phonographic Association of America, Copyright Review Center, Directors Guild of America, Writers Guild, National Voice Actors Guild, Concept Art Society, Professional Photographers of America, Actors Guild of Television and Radio Artists, Writers Guild of the West, Writers Guild of the East, Composers, Authors and Publishers Association, Collective Rights Licensing Society of America, International Federation of Theatre Stage Practitioners, Society of Composers and Lyricists, National Music Publishers Association, Recording Academy, Nashville Songwriters Association International, The North American Songwriters Association, the Black Music Action Coalition, the Musical Artists Alliance, the Human Arts Movement, and the American Independent Music Association.
Author: Zheng Youde
编辑：Eleven