Top Noteworthy Copyright Stories from March 2026
Brace yourselves for this copyright news roundup. March 2026 was one of the busiest months in recent memory for the copyright world, with huge developments on critical copyright issues that all creators and copyright owners must know about. A clearly erroneous decision from the U.S. Supreme Court sent seismic-level shockwaves throughout the copyright community. AI legislative frameworks were introduced by the White House and in Congress, addressing important AI copyright issues in different ways. In addition, important notices were published by the Copyright Office that propose dramatically increased copyright registration fees, elimination of one type of registration application, and potential long-awaited alternative fee structures. Here are the must-know copyright developments from March 2026 in addition to a few other key pieces of news.
The Biggest Copyright Developments from March
SCOTUS Shocks Copyright World in a Flawed Decision in Sony v. Cox Case
On March 25, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous and highly flawed decision in the Sony v. Cox case, holding that Cox was not contributorily liable for the infringing activities of Cox internet users despite multiple notices of identified instances of infringing activities, including repeat infringers, from Sony. The majority opinion, penned by Justice Thomas, took an extremely narrow interpretation that a conduit service provider is contributorily liable for a user’s infringement only if it intended that the provided service be used for infringement, which is proven by either the party inducing infringement or by the party tailoring the provided service to that infringement. The Court stated that Cox did neither, and thus was not liable for contributory infringement. As for Sony’s argument that such an interpretation would render the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) safe harbor provisions obsolete, with shockingly little legal analysis, the Court merely stated that Sony’s argument was overly broad, noting that the DMCA merely creates new defenses from liability and since the DMCA does not “bear adversely upon … a defense by the service provider that the service provider’s conduct is not infringing.” The decision was so poorly conceived by the Court that it was roundly criticized by organizations, individuals, and academics who rarely agree with one another on most copyright issues.
On March 25, the Copyright Alliance issued a statement noting that the Court’s clearly erroneous decision would harm creators of all types and sizes in combatting online infringement and the foundation and operation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Copyright Alliance CEO Keith Kupferschmid stated, “To be effective, copyright law must protect creators of all types and sizes from the harmful effects of copyright infringement, whether such infringement is analog or digital form or takes place online or offline. The Court’s clearly erroneous decision shows little, if any, deference for well-established secondary liability copyright concepts and their importance to the foundation and operation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s (DMCA) safe harbor provisions to protect copyright owners and individual creators.” Other members of the copyright community officially expressed their disappointment with the decision in public statements including the Association of American Publishers (AAP), Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and Motion Picture Association (MPA).
Multiple National AI Legislative Frameworks Proposed Addressing Copyright Issues
On March 18, Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) released a discussion draft of the TRUMP AMERICA AI Act, which is a comprehensive federal AI legislative framework intended to guide federal AI regulation that would preempt existing state laws. Among other issues, the draft addresses creator protections, including a provision explicitly stating that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works for the purpose of training, fine-tuning, developing, or creating AI shall not constitute fair use.
Two days later, on March 20, the Trump Administration unveiled a National AI Legislative Framework, explaining that “achieving [AI] goals requires a commonsense national policy framework that both enables American industry to innovate and thrive and ensures that all Americans benefit from this technological revolution.” The framework outlines six key objectives, including Respecting Intellectual Property Rights and Supporting Creators. Addressing copyright, the Framework says that “although the Administration believes that training of AI models on copyrighted material does not violate copyright laws, it acknowledges arguments to the contrary exist and therefore supports allowing the Courts to resolve this issue. Similarly, Congress should not take any actions that would impact the judiciary’s resolution of whether training on copyrighted material constitutes fair use.” It goes on to say that Congress should “consider enabling licensing frameworks or collective rights systems for rights holders to collectively negotiate compensation from AI providers, without incurring antitrust liability. Any such legislation, however, should not address when or whether such licensing is required.” After urging Congress to consider establishing protections against digital replicas, the Framework concludes that “Congress should continue to carefully monitor the development of copyright precedents and enforcement in the courts and evaluate whether, due to novel AI considerations, additional action beyond that proposed here is needed to fill potential gaps or provide additional protections for content creators.”
In response to both AI frameworks, Copyright Alliance CEO Keith Kupferschmid stated: “The Copyright Alliance is pleased to see that the Administration’s National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence issued earlier today acknowledges the need for any AI framework to ‘respect[] intellectual property rights and support[] creators.’ Specifically, the White House framework acknowledges that there are differing views related to fair use of copyrighted works for AI training, and reflects the long held views of the Copyright Alliance and many others in the creative community that AI fair use determinations should be left to the judiciary where the Supreme Court has ruled that ‘bright-line rules’ are inappropriate. We also applaud the administration’s recognition that free market AI licensing is crucial to preserving the creative economy and the 11.6 million American workers and over $2 trillion in GDP it supports. And we thank Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) for her continual support for the creative community and for releasing her thoughtful and comprehensive TRUMP AMERICA AI Act discussion draft earlier this week. We especially applaud the draft’s provisions that directly address the use of copyrighted works for AI training.”
USCO Launches Fee Study and Solicits Comments on Alternative Registration Fee Structures
The U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) is soliciting comments on its fee study outlining its proposals to raise fees for various USCO services including for registration, recordation, and other services and on whether the Copyright Office should institute alternative registration fee structures. We highly encourage individual creators and copyright owners to submit feedback and comments for both notices by the deadlines. More information is below.
- On March 19, the Copyright Office announced a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) requesting public comments on proposed changes to its fee schedule. The NPRM proposes fee increases across the board to basic and group registration, recordation, appeals, and expedited and special handling. The Office also proposes to eliminate the Single Application registration option. The deadline for submitting comments in response to the NPRM is May 4. After public comments, the fee schedule goes to Congress, and it will be instituted 120 days after submission unless Congress enacts a law stating in substance that it does not approve it.
- A week later on March 26, the Copyright Office published a notice of inquiry (NOI) soliciting comments on the feasibility of alternative fee structures, their impact on participation in the registration system, and the potential economic effects. The Copyright Office is soliciting comments on four alternative fee structures: (1) charging different fees for different types of works; (2) charging different fees for individuals and organizations; (3) reduced fees for small entities; and (4) subscription pricing. Comments are due by June 24.
ALI Responds to Letter from Congress on Controversial Copyright Restatement Project
On March 19, American Law Institute (ALI) Director Diane Wood sent a letter to Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Adam Schiff (D-CA) about ALI’s Restatement of Copyright Law in response to the Senators’ letter to the ALI dated February 19. As was expected, Wood continued to defend the Copyright Restatement project alleging that it was developed through “the ALI’s standard, transparent process, involving a broad and diverse group of subject-matter experts, interest-group representatives, practicing lawyers, judges, and academics.” Wood did her best to downplay the mass resignations numerous times in the letter but also admitted that the Copyright Restatement was somewhat unique because “it is unusual for participants in an ALI project to resign.” While Wood did indirectly respond to many of the questions posed by the Senators in their letter and attempted to paint the Copyright Restatement in a favorable light, she also failed to directly respond to several of the Senators’ direct questions and in many instances provided answers that clearly conflicted with many of the experiences of the participants who resigned.
Other Copyright News
Almost 100 Copyright Lawsuits Against AI Companies
The number of AI copyright lawsuits continue to climb towards 100 with at least ten cases being filed in March 2026 alone against AI companies over the unlicensed use of literary, musical, sound recording, database, and 3D models to train various AI models. Plaintiffs include Encyclopedia Britannica, Merriam-Webster, BMG, Gracenote, owner of the Chicken Soup for the Soul literary franchise, and individual artists and musicians.
Pro Codes Act Introduced in Senate: On March 19, Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Chris Coons (D-DE) introduced S. 4145, the Protecting and Enhancing Public Access to Codes Act (Pro Codes Act). The bill and its counterpart in the House, H.R.4072, would ensure public access to codes and standards that are incorporated by reference into law while also ensuring that these codes and standards retain their copyright protections. The Copyright Alliance issued a supportive statement of the bill’s introduction.
District Court Denies Injunction for Valancourt Against Future Demand for Mandatory Deposit Copies from USCO: On March 25, the district court of the District of Columbia issued an opinion in a remand decision of the Valancourt v. Perlmutter case, ruling that Valancourt, an independent book publisher, would not be able to seek an injunction against the U.S. Copyright Office from making future demands for mandatory deposit copies for the Library of Congress’ collections under Section 407 of the Copyright Act. The court reasoned that the DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued a limited ruling that the specific demands in the Copyright Office’s April 2018 demand letter for physical copies of Valancourt’s copyrighted works constituted an unconstitutional taking of the publishers’ property. The district court further stated that there was no evidence on the record that future demand letters from the Copyright Office would entail the same demands as the noncompliant April 2018 letter and that there was no way of knowing what a future demand letter might seek and on which basis or mechanisms it would employ. The court instead issued a declaration that the April 2018 demand letter violated the Takings Clause and that the letter was null and void and issued an injunction against the Copyright Office from enforcing the letter.
Publishers Sue Notorious Pirate Website Anna’s Archive
On March 6, a group of publishers including Apress Media, Cengage, Elsevier, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins, John Wiley & Sons, Macmillan, McGraw Hill, Penguin Random House, and Simon and Schuster filed a complaint against the notorious pirate website Anna’s Archive and its operators over the unauthorized reproduction, downloading, and distribution of plaintiffs’ literary works. The complaint states that Anna’s Archive’s pirated a collection of plaintiffs’ books, journal articles, and other literary works that is nearly one petabyte (1000 TB). In addition to detailing Anna’s Archive’s activities in mirroring pirate websites that have been subject to U.S. court orders and criminally charged by the U.S. government and its facilitation of torrenting of pirated copies of plaintiffs’ works, the complaint also details Anna’s Archives’ public claims and advertising of its illegal collections and special high-speed access to companies in China and Russia and to AI developers in exchange for “enterprise-level donation[s].” The complaint includes one claim of direct copyright infringement.
USTR Publishes 2025 Notorious Markets Report with Focus on Sports Streaming
On March 3, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) published its 2025 Review of Notorious Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy, which identifies 37 online markets and 32 physical markets that facilitate piracy or counterfeiting. This year’s report includes an Issue Focus section that examines challenges surrounding copyright enforcement against piracy of sports broadcasts through illicit streaming services, illegal retransmissions, and pirate IPTV operations. In the report, USTR notes that “[e]nhanced legal remedies specifically designed for live content, technological innovations in detection and protection, strengthened international coordination, modernized national legislation, specialized enforcement capacity, and improved consumer education all play essential roles.” The report also highlights successful enforcement actions against online piracy markets including nsw2u, which distributed pirated copies of Nintendo Switch games, and illegal streaming service MagisTV. Ambassador Jamieson Greer stated, “With the United States co-hosting the FIFA World Cup, we are particularly attuned to sales of counterfeit merchandise and illicit streaming of sports broadcasts. Not only do such activities amount to intellectual property theft, they also harm consumers…” More information is available here.
UK Government Publishes AI and Copyright Consultation Report; Rejects Broad TDM Exception Proposal
The UK Government published a report resulting from its AI and copyright consultation, stating that “a broad copyright exception with opt-out is no longer the government’s preferred way forward,” and that it would refrain from introducing reforms until further evidence is gathered on how copyright laws are impacting the development and deployment of AI. It states that it will continue to monitor developments in technology, litigation, international approaches, and the licensing market. The report also notes, “[i]nstead, we propose to monitor the market as it develops and will keep market-led approaches to licensing under review.” The report states that the Government is aiming to launch a Creative Content Exchange (CCE) by summer 2026, which “will test a range of commercial models for licensing” to support access to valuable datasets. It further mentions a need for greater transparency about how AI developers train their models, including the materials and data they use and states that it will continue to work with industry and experts to develop best practices and adoption of market-led tools that may inform future potential legislation.
Copyright Events in April
GIPC IP Summit: On April 21 from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m., the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Global Innovation Policy Center (GIPC) will host its 2026 Global IP Summit to explore the evolving landscape of IP policy. The event will focus on fostering collaboration between business and government to address emerging IP challenges and opportunities. Discussions will be led by representatives from government, academia, and the private sector, offering a variety of perspectives on how IP policies can drive innovation, creativity, and economic growth. More information is available on the registration page.
CCC Webinar on Navigating Copyright in a Complex Global Landscape: On April 22 at 10 a.m. ET, the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) will host a webinar titled Navigating Copyright in a Complex Global Landscape to explore the various elements that businesses must understand to stay copyright compliant in a global environment. The session will cover topics such as global complexities of copyright, common compliance challenges, intersections of AI and copyright, strategies and solutions for success, and more. More information is available on the registration page.
Copyright Alliance World IP Day Panel Discussion: On April 23 from 2-3:30 p.m. ET the Copyright Alliance will host a World IP Day (WIPD) panel via Zoom. As announced by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), its 2026 topic is IP and Sports: Ready, Set, Innovate! The Copyright Alliance’s 2026 WIPD panel topic is The Business of Sports and Copyright. The confirmed panelists are Michael Lewis, Vice President and Associate General Counsel, Law and Policy, Entertainment Software Association (ESA); Christian Dubay, Vice President. Engineering and Research and Chief Engineer, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA); Edward Muncey, Co-Founder of Stream Enforcement LLC and Anti-Piracy Representative, UFC; Guillermo Rodriguez, Director of Live Content Protection, Motion Picture Association (MPA) and Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE); and Randy Cinco, Vice President, Business Affairs and Licensing, BMI. The panel moderator is Miriam Lord, Associate Register of Copyrights and Director of Public Information and Education at the U.S. Copyright Office. More information is available on the registration page.
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!