The MPA Warns of “Inflexible Rules” around AI and Copyright
The Motion Picture Association submitted a 77-page filing to the U.S. Copyright Office, stating that the current framework is sufficient without AI-specific regulations, and inflexible and unclear guidelines may harm creative freedom.
While there is push to establish legal guardrails around artificial intelligence (AI), Hollywood studios are voicing concerns over potentially stringent regulations regarding AI and copyright law. The Motion Picture Association (MPA) recently filed a document with the U.S. Copyright Office, expressing their stance on the issue and asserting that the current copyright laws are sufficient to address concerns arising due to AI technologies.
The MPA, which includes key players from major studios, thinks that while AI does bring forth new questions, they can be addressed within the framework of existing copyright doctrines and principles. They emphasize that there is no need for specialized legislation or rules to apply copyright law in the context of AI at the current time.
In the filing, the MPA's legal team, including Karyn Temple, Benjamin Sheffner, and Terrica Carrington, highlighted that AI technologies can enhance human creativity rather than replace it. They believe that these developments can co-exist harmoniously with a copyright system that incentivizes original expression and protects copyright owners' rights.
The MPA's filing criticizes the Copyright Office’s position on the protection of content containing AI-generated material, arguing that it does not adequately distinguish between generative AI and routine post-production AI tools.
Despite the MPA's position, the government has been taking steps to regulate AI. President Joe Biden recently issued an executive order addressing concerns about AI, including a provision for establishing standards for watermarking AI-generated content to identify "deepfakes". However, the order did not delve into copyright issues, leaving further action to Congress.
The MPA warns against an "inflexible rule" that may not recognize the extent of human creativity in AI-generated works. They also highlighted potential issues around the use of copyrighted material in AI training models, noting that the current "fair use" standard is a suitable measure to evaluate potential infringement cases.
The MPA’s position is more of a call for flexibility: while strong copyright protection is vital for the industry, flexibility is needed to foster creativity and development. They have also expressed concern over the proposed No Fakes Act and any requirement to label or disclose the use of AI-generated material for creative and entertainment purposes, asserting that such requirements may hinder creative freedom.