In 2024, there were several federal bills introduced and various studies and discussion about potential copyright-related regulations and legislation, but most remain pending or forthcoming. Proposed legislation related to artificial intelligence (AI) was the most prevalent and anticipated, and will be the focus of this article, with some reference to non-AI copyright-related rulemakings and legislation.

I. Enacted Legislation

Many states introduced bills, and some passed legislation related to AI, largely related to privacy, right of publicity, deepfakes, and election issues. Perhaps the most significant and broad-reaching copyright-related legislation is California AB 2013, signed into law in October 2024. AB 2013 is part of a package of AI-related bills in California, including those combating election-related “deepfakes” and misinformation (AB 2839 and AB 2655).

AB 2013 requires any generative “artificial intelligence” “developer” that makes any technology available to California residents to include public disclosures on its website documentation that provides, among other requirements, a high-level summary of the datasets used in the development and training of the AI technology or service. This summary must include, among other things, the sources or owners of the datasets, whether the datasets included any IP-protected data, whether the datasets were licensed or purchased, and the time period in which the datasets were collected. The deadline for disclosure is January 1, 2026 and thereafter, before each time a generative AI system or service, or a substantial modification to a generative AI system or service, is made publicly available to Californians for use.

“Developer” includes original developers of a generative AI technology or service and any person or entity meeting the definition of “developer” that makes any “substantial modification” to a generative AI technology or service released after January 1, 2022. “Substantially modify,” as defined by the bill, includes new versions, releases, retraining, and fine-tuning that materially changes functionality or performance; this of course significantly broadens the reach of the law.

AB 2013 does not apply to generative AI technology that is (1) solely designed to ensure security and integrity, (2) solely intended for the operation of aircraft within the national airspace, or (3) developed for national security, military, or defense purposes, and is made available only to a federal entity.

II. Introduced Federal Bills

Several bills were introduced in 2024, though they were primarily focused on AI-related fraud, deepfakes, and digital replicas. This included the NO FAKES Act of 2024, introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in September 2024 (HR 9551), by Representatives Salazar, Dean, Moran, Morelle, Wittman, and Schiff, which was referred to the House Judiciary Committee; and the companion NO FAKES Act of 2024 introduced in the U.S. Senate in July 2024 (S 4875), by Senators Coons, Blackburn, Klobuchar, and Tillis, which was similarly referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The stated goal of the NO FAKES Act is primarily to protect intellectual property rights in the voice and visual likeness of individuals. The NO FAKES Act appears to have bipartisan support and is legislation to watch in 2025.

Also introduced in the Senate in July 2024 was the Content Origin Protection and Integrity from Edited and Deepfaked Media Act of 2024 (S 4674 – The COPIED Act), by Senators Cantwell, Blackburn, and Heinrich, referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, with the stated purpose to “require transparency with respect to content and content provenance information, to protect artistic content, and for other purposes.” That bill primarily relates to provenance information for content and detection of “synthetic content.”

Most related to copyright is the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act of 2024 introduced in the House in April 2024 (HR 7913) by Representative Schiff and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, with the stated primary goal to “require a notice be submitted to the Register of Copyrights with respect to copyrighted works used in building generative AI systems.” The bill would require, among other things, that at least 30 days before the generative AI system is made available to consumers, the developer submit to the Register of Copyrights a notice of copyrighted works used in or to alter the training dataset and a URL for such dataset. Given the anticipated reports from the Copyright Office and USPTO and limited support for this bill, the general consensus is that this bill will not move forward and will be replaced by bills that reflect the anticipated reports.

Non-AI-copyright related bills that captured attention in 2024 were the PRO Codes Act introduced in the Senate (S 835) and in the House (HR 1631), by Senator Coons and Representative Issa, respectively. The bills addressed copyright protections for privately developed technical standards, stating that a technical standard shall retain its copyright protection even if it has been incorporated by reference into a law or regulation, if the applicable standards development organization makes the standard available on a free publicly accessible online source. It also included reporting requirements for the Copyright Office and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and requirements that the GAO conduct studies and report on the findings, including the potential impacts of the bill on consumers and historically disadvantaged communities. The House version failed in July 2024, though it remains one to watch (perhaps with modifications) in 2025.

III. Anticipated Guidance and Legislation to Watch for in 2025

In October 2023, an executive order regarding AI was issued that ordered the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) director to consult with the director of the U.S. Copyright Office within 180 days after the U.S. Copyright Office issues its forthcoming AI study, and “issue recommendations to the President on potential executive actions relating to copyright and AI. The recommendations shall address any copyright and related issues discussed in the United States Copyright Office’s study, including the scope of protection for works produced using AI and the treatment of copyrighted works in AI training.”

While it remains to be seen whether the recommendations will be required by the new administration in 2025, the Copyright Office has conducted extensive studies and is preparing its AI-related report, which will issue in several sections and analyze the impact of AI on copyright and making recommendations about any legislative or regulatory action. On July 31, 2024, the Copyright Office published Part 1 of the report, which addresses the topic of digital replicas. Additional parts related to copyrightability and training AI models are expected (but not promised) by the end of December 2024, as the Register of Copyrights has been careful to say that the Office is focused on getting the recommendations right rather than meeting a certain deadline.

In addition, the Copyright Office indicated that it intends to publish an update to the Compendium of Copyright Office Practices to address issues surrounding AI and has already issued Copyright Registration Guidance for Works Containing AI-Generated Materials.

As for legislation, we can anticipate that this may come later in 2025 with the Bipartisan Senate AI Working Group stating that it will “[c]onsider federal policy issues related to the data sets used by AI developers to train their models, including data sets that might contain sensitive personal data or are protected by copyright, and evaluate whether there is a need for transparency requirements” but that it will wait to “[r]eview the results of existing and forthcoming reports from the US Copyright Office and the US Patent and Trademark Office on how AI impacts copyright and intellectual property law, and take action as deemed appropriate to ensure the US continues to lead the world on this front.”

IV. Non-AI Copyright-Related Rulemakings

In addition to AI-related activity, there were several non-AI copyright-related rulemakings in 2024.

This included two rulemakings related to the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), including one through which the Copyright Office published a final rule establishing regulations governing active proceedings and post-determination procedures before the (CCB) (2021-8) and another related to the process and fee to obtain a certified final determination from the CCB (2024-5).

In another rulemaking, the Copyright Office established a new group registration option for frequently updated news websites (2023-8), which will enable news publishers to register a group of updates to a news website as a collective work with a deposit composed of identifying material representing sufficient portions of the works included, rather than the complete contents of the website.

Relating to music, the Copyright Office published a final rule (2022-5) that the derivative works exception to termination rights under the Copyright Act does not apply to the statutory blanket mechanical license established under the Music Modernization Act and directed the Mechanical Licensing Collective to distribute royalties accordingly.

Finally, and perhaps most highly anticipated, was the Ninth Triennial Section 1201 Proceeding, whereby the librarian of Congress, at the Copyright Office Register’s recommendation, adopted in full over two dozen temporary (three-year) exemptions waiving the general prohibition against circumvention of technological measures used to prevent unauthorized access to copyrighted works. This included renewal of all of the exemptions previously adopted except for the exemption permitting circumvention of video games in the form of computer programs for the purpose of allowing an individual with a physical disability to use alternative software or hardware input methods because no petition for renewal was filed. It also included three new categories of exemptions, namely (1) expansion of the exemption for audiovisual and literary works for the purpose of text and data mining for scholarly research and teaching; (2) a new exemption for computer programs that control retail-level commercial food preparation equipment for purposes of diagnosis, maintenance, and repair; and (3) a new exemption for computer programs for purposes of accessing, storing, and sharing operational data, including diagnostic and telematics data, of motorized land vehicles, marine vessels, and commercial and agricultural vehicles or vessels (e.g., for monitoring vehicle use, as opposed to the already-existing repair exemption).

In sum, there was some activity for general copyright rules and regulations, a lot of studying and contemplating AI-related copyright regulations and legislation, and lots to look forward to in 2025, especially related to AI.

Image Source: Deposit PHotos
Author: feepic
Image ID: 690060736