Copyright in Congress: 2024 Year in Review
As usual, Congress considered a host of copyright issues in 2024. Most of these issues fall into one of three buckets: (1) Artificial Intelligence (AI); (2) Piracy; or (3) U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) Modernization. Several important copyright issues fall outside these areas that Congress addressed. Below we summarize these Congressional activities and look into our crystal balls to try and predict what to expect from Congress in 2025 on these and many other important copyright issues.
What Copyright Legislation Did Congress Introduce in 2024?
There were two bills introduced in 2024 that were solely directed toward copyright and AI transparency—the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act of 2024 and the TRAIN Act.
The Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act: In April, Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) introduced the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act of 2024, H.R. 7913. The bill, which is supported by many in the creative community, would establish a process that obligates a person who creates or alters a training dataset used to build a generative artificial intelligence (GAI) model to submit a notice to the Register of Copyrights containing a sufficiently detailed summary of any copyrighted works used in the training dataset and its URL, if made public. Noncompliance with the process will result in a civil penalty amount of not less than $5,000. The bill would also direct the Register to maintain a publicly available online database containing all notices filed under this provision.
TRAIN Act: The other bill introduced last year, right before the Thanksgiving holiday, was the Transparency and Responsibility for Artificial Intelligence Networks (TRAIN) Act, S. 5379. This bill, which was introduced by Senator Peter Welch (D-VT), would create a new administrative subpoena process in the Copyright Act that allows for a copyright owner to request the clerk of the U.S. district court to issue a subpoena to a generative AI developer or deployer for disclosure of copies or records “sufficient to identify with certainty” the copyrighted works they believe to have been used in AI training. Failure to comply with a subpoena creates a rebuttable presumption that the model developer made copies of the copyrighted work. In a press release, Senator Welch stated, “This is simple: if your work is used to train A.I., there should be a way for you, the copyright holder, to determine that it’s been used by a training model, and you should get compensated if it was. We need to give America’s musicians, artists, and creators a tool to find out when A.I. companies are using their work to train models without artists’ permission. As A.I. evolves and gets more embedded into our daily lives, we need to set a higher standard for transparency.”
While not directly related to copyright, it is worth mentioning that there were also several bills introduced and considered relating to protection for so-called digital replicas (often also called protection against deep fakes or protection against the illicit use of name, image, and likeness). These bills include the No Artificial Intelligence Fake Replicas and Unauthorized Duplications (NO AI FRAUD) Act of 2023, H.R. 6943; the Content Origin Protection and Integrity from Edited and Deepfaked Media Act (COPIED ACT), S. 4674; The Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act of 2024, which was introduced in the Senate as S. 4875 and in the House as H.R. 9551; and the Preventing Abuse of Digital Replicas Act (PADRA), H.R. 10550.
There were many other AI bills, such as Protecting Consumers from Deceptive AI Act, H.R. 7766, that would impact copyright but apply much more broadly. There are just too many bills that fall into that bucket to summarize them in this blog post.
Other Copyright Legislation Introduced in 2024
While AI was a big focus for members of Congress last year, it wasn’t the only focus, including the following bills:
PRO Codes Act: In April, the House Judiciary Committee held a markup during which they favorably voted the Protecting and Enhancing Public Access to Codes (Pro Codes) Act, H.R. 1631 out of the committee by a vote of 19-4. The Pro Codes Act confirms that model codes and standards do not lose copyright protection by virtue of having been adopted or incorporated by reference into law or regulation, provided that the codes/standards are accessible to the public. Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) initially submitted 50 amendments to the bill but only advanced 14 of them. Five amendments were adopted during the hearing, including an amendment requiring the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and U.S. Copyright Office to study the cost and impact of the bill, and an amendment to accommodate accessibility for persons with disabilities. In July, the Pro Codes Act was taken up on suspension (in which 2/3 of “yes” votes are required to pass the bill through) by the full House of Representatives and narrowly failed to pass (248-127).
There were three other copyright bills—BIRDIE Act, Intelligence Authorization Act, and TRIPS Waivers Act—introduced in 2024, but these bills for one reason or another did not receive Congressional consideration.
BIRDIE Act: In February 2024, Representative Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) introduced the Bolstering Intellectual Rights against Digital Infringement Enhancement (BIRDIE) Act, H.R. 7228. The bill would amend the definition of “architectural work” in section 101 of the Copyright Act to include “the design of a course on which golf is played (except for any course on which mini golf, or other similar game, is played),” so that golf course designs would be protected under copyright law.
Intelligence Authorization Act: In June, Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) introduced the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025, S. 4443, a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2025 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government and other governmental agencies. The bill includes technical amendments to Section 105 of the Copyright Act pertaining to U.S. Government works. The main technical change proposed by the bill is to remove the definition of “covered Secretary” in Section 105(d)(3) of the Copyright Act and include the Secretary of Homeland Security Authority and Secretary of Transportation Authority under Section 105(c) of the Act. The bill would have also made a small technical amendment in the definitions section.
TRIPS Waivers Act: In November, Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) introduced the Timely Reporting of IP Rights (TRIPS) Waivers Act, H.R. 10103, aimed at ensuring Congressional oversight before international agreements affecting American Intellectual Property (IP) rights are negotiated. The bill, which is co-sponsored by Representative Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI), would require the Judiciary Committees of both Houses of Congress to receive analyses of the potential impacts on IP rights at least sixty days before any negotiations begin. The bill targets all intellectual property, including patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and plant variety rights, in response to concerns over waivers under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) proposed at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Previous efforts to introduce similar legislation have stalled, but this latest bill reflects ongoing concerns about the impact of IP waivers on innovation, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
What Congressional Hearings Were Held in 2024?
Congress held numerous copyright-related hearings in 2024 on a range of important topics such as terrestrial broadcast rights for sound recordings, artificial intelligence (AI), modernization of the U.S. Copyright Office, and piracy.
Piracy: In May, the House Judiciary Committee’s (HJC) Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Subcommittee (IP Subcommittee) held a hearing titledIntellectual Property: Enforcement Activities by the Executive Branch, during which subcommittee members and witnesses examined enforcement of IP in the United States, with a focus on U.S. agencies and government entities charged with IP enforcement-related tasks. During the hearing, members asked about the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) use of the Protecting Lawful Streaming Act (PLSA) to combat illegal streaming of copyrighted works. The Department of Justice (DOJ) witness responded that DOJ had recently concluded its first case under the Act but noted that it has not been used as extensively as hoped, and that the DOJ needs additional resources to deal with these issues in foreign jurisdictions.
Terrestrial Broadcast Rights: In June, the HJC IP Subcommittee held a hearing titled Radio, Music, and Copyrights: 100 Years of Inequity for Recording Artists to discuss the American Music Fairness Act, H.R.791, a bill introduced in 2023 by Representative Issa (D-CA) and cosponsored by Representatives Nadler (D-NY), Lieu (D-CA), McClintock (R-CA) and Green (R-TN) that would create a public performance right for non-subscription terrestrial radio broadcast transmissions, subject to numerous exceptions.
U.S. Copyright Office Modernization: In June, the House Administration Committee held a hearing titled The U.S. Copyright Office: Customers, Communities, and Modernization Efforts. Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter was the only hearing witness. Written statements were submitted by the Copyright Alliance, PLUS Coalition, Professional Photographers of America (PPA), News/Media Alliance, Association of American Publishers (AAP) and the Authors Guild, National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA), Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), and several others. During the hearing, members highlighted the need to simplify the copyright registration process, address widespread copyright infringement, and develop IT and AI policies. They also acknowledged the Copyright Office’s progress with the Enterprise Copyright System (ECS) and emphasized the importance of timely guidance on AI-generated content as well as guidance on the use of copyrighted materials in AI training. The Copyright Alliance posted a blog summarizing the hearing.
Artificial Intelligence: Throughout the year the HJC IP Subcommittee continued to hold hearings related to artificial intelligence. In February, the Subcommittee convened a field hearing in Los Angeles, CA, titled Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property: Part II – Identity in the Age of AI. The hearing primarily focused on how Congress can support responsible innovation in applications of AI technology and examined the growing concerns about the misuse of AI, especially with respect to the likeness, voice, and other identifying characteristics of individuals. Issues addressed during the hearing included whether artists should be compensated for use of their works for AI training and whether enforcement mechanisms like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s (DMCA) notice-and-takedown are effective for addressing digital replica issues.
The IP subcommittee continued its string of AI hearings with the last in the three-part series: Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property: Part III – IP Protection for AI-Assisted Inventions and Creative Works. The hearing was convened to examine the standards and policy considerations over whether intellectual property laws should protect inventions or creative works generated with the assistance of AI and whether current guidance and policies on inventorship and authorship should be re-examined. Subcommittee members inquired about the desirability and necessity of copyright protections for works containing AI-generated elements, the effect of input on the copyrightability of the output, and the appropriate level of human involvement and contribution necessary for copyright protections in an AI-generated work.
Later that month, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s (SJC) Subcommittee on Intellectual Property held a hearing titled The NO FAKES Act: Protecting Americans from Unauthorized Digital Replicas. The hearing focused on the increasing use of AI-generated replicas, such as deepfake videos and voice-cloning tools, and the legal and ethical issues they present. The witnesses discussed issues associated with protecting artists’ identities and intellectual property and the potential misuse of AI technology.
U.S. Copyright Office Oversight: Toward the end of 2024, the SJC IP Subcommittee held a U.S. Copyright Office oversight hearing. Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter was the sole witness. Topics covered during the hearing included piracy and no-fault injunctions, the Office’s AI study, Office modernization, the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), the 1201 rulemaking, and the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC). Register Perlmutter testified that the Copyright Office has been very busy working on a variety of projects including its AI study, completing year two of the CCB, and completing the recent Ninth Triennial Rulemaking Proceeding. She also noted that the Office continues to make progress on registration modernization efforts and will be asking for increased funding for modernization for fiscal year 2026 to expedite and accelerate its registration modernization efforts.
Other Congressional Activities in 2024
There were a couple of other Congressional activities of note beyond hearings and legislation.
House AI Task Force: In February, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) announced the launch of a bipartisan Task Force on Artificial Intelligence chaired by Representatives Obernolte (R-CA) and Lieu (D-CA). Over the course of the year the AI Task Force held numerous briefings on various topics. In July, the Task Force held a closed-door briefing on AI and intellectual property. There were six panelists who spoke at the 90-minute briefing included representatives from the Copyright Alliance, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and the Motion Picture Association (MPA). The briefing focused on the range of typical intellectual property issues that arise when discussing AI, such protections (or lack thereof) for voice, image, and likeness, the need for transparency, enforcement actions for infringements generated by AI and how to allocate liability, copyrightability of works created wholly or in part with AI, and—at a very high level—fair use. On December 17, the AI Task Force released final report, covering a variety of AI topics including intellectual property. The report identifies and addresses four IP-related issues: (1) the ingestion of IP-protected works for AI training; (2) the implication of IP rights and availability of protections regarding AI outputs; (3) transparency in the training, functionality, and outputs of the AI systems; and (4) protection of individuals’ “personhood” rights. The AI Task Force recommends that law, regulations, and agency guidance on AI authorship and the ability to obtain IP protection for AI-assisted creative works be clarified to promote the use of AI tools while still protecting human creators and innovators.
Senate AI Working Group: In May, Senate Majority Leader Schumer (D-NY), along with Senators Rounds (R-SD), Heinrich (D-NM), and Young (R-IN), released their bipartisan Senate AI Working Group AI roadmap titled Driving U.S. Innovation in Artificial Intelligence. The roadmap does not call for specific legislation but directs relevant committees to review and consider certain issues. The document includes a section titled “Transparency, Explainability, Intellectual Property, and Copyright.” In terms of AI and copyright-related issues, the working group directs relevant Congressional committees to consider numerous AI issues including legislation that protects against the unauthorized use of one’s name, image, likeness, and voice in the context of AI and appropriate actions to ensure U.S. leadership on intellectual property and copyright issues based on the results of existing and forthcoming reports from the U.S. Copyright Office and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on issues concerning AI and IP/copyright law.
What to Expect from Congress In 2025
Artificial Intelligence will undoubtedly be the headlining issue for Congress in 2025. With much of the groundwork for digital replica legislation and transparency legislation being laid in 2024, I would expect those issues to return and to receive more significant consideration by Congress in 2025. In addition to AI, we would expect a renewed focus on site blocking and other much-needed antipiracy measures, as well as a continued push to enact legislation related to copyright protection for model codes (like the Pro Codes Act) and terrestrial broadcast rights for sound recordings (like AMFA).
Be sure to check out our other 2024 roundup blogs, including a post on copyright court cases, AI copyright cases, and our Congressional year-in-review blog.
If you aren’t already a member of the Copyright Alliance, you can join today by completing our Individual Creator Members membership form! Members gain access to monthly newsletters, educational webinars, and so much more — all for free!