Copyright

" ... “Rights owner” means either of the following: (1) The owner of a copyright enforceable under the copyright laws of the United States pursuant to Title 17 of the United States Code, Public Law 94-553 (17 U.S.C. Sec. 101 et seq.). (2) The owner of a sound recording fixed before February 15, 1972, enforceable under Title 17 of the United States Code (17 U.S.C. Sec. 1401)."

" ... “Covered material” means a material registered, preregistered, or indexed with the United States Copyright Office pursuant to Title 17 of the United States Code, Public Law 94-553 (17 U.S.C. Sec. 101 et seq.)."

" ... (5) Whether the datasets include any data protected by copyright, trademark, or patent, or whether the datasets are entirely in the public domain. (6) Whether the datasets were purchased or licensed by the developer."

" ... Art. 42 The automated use of works, such as extraction, reproduction, storage and transformation, in text and data mining processes in artificial intelligence systems, in activities carried out by research organizations and institutions, journalism and by museums, archives and libraries, does not constitute a violation of copyright, provided that: I - it does not have as its objective the simple reproduction, display or dissemination of the original work itself; II - the use occurs to the extent necessary for the objective to be achieved; III - it does not unjustifiably harm the economic interests of the owners; and IV - it does not compete with the normal exploitation of the works. § 1 Any reproductions of works for the data mining activity shall be kept under strict security conditions, and only for the time necessary to carry out the activity or for the specific purpose of verifying the results of scientific research. § 2 The provisions of the caput apply to the activity of text and data mining for other analytical activities in artificial intelligence systems, in compliance with the conditions of the items of the caput and § 1, provided that the activities do not communicate the work to the public and that access to the works has been obtained legitimately. § 3 The activity of text and data mining that involves personal data shall be subject to the provisions of Law No. 13,709, of August 14, 2018 (General Personal Data Protection Law)."

" ... The term “copyrighted work” means a work protected in the United States under a law relating to copyrights."

" ... When an AI developer uses the copyrighted data of others for model training, if the use is different from the original purpose or function of the data and does not affect the normal use of the data or unreasonably harm the legitimate rights and interests of the data’s owner, such use is a reasonable use of data."

" ... For data use behaviors that meet the above reasonable use circumstances, the AI developer may forgo payment of remuneration to the data’s owner without the data owner’s permission, but the data source shall be marked in a conspicuous manner."

" ... INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.—The term “intellectual property” means—(A) any work protected by a copyright under title 17, United States Code; (B) any property protected by a patent granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office under title 35, United States Code; (C) any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, that is registered as a trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office under the Act entitled “An Act to provide for the registration and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international conventions, and for other purposes”, approved July 5, 1946 (commonly known as the “Lanham Act” or the “Trademark Act of 1946”) (15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.); (D) a trade secret (as defined in section 1839 of title 18, United States Code); or (E) any other form of intellectual property."

" ... The term “intellectual property” means— (A) any work protected by a copyright under title 17, United States Code; (B) any property protected by a patent granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office under title 35, United States Code; (C) any word, name, symbol, or device, or any combination thereof, that is registered as a trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office under the Act entitled “An Act to provide for the registration and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international conventions, and for other purposes”, approved July 5, 1946 (commonly known as the “Lanham Act” or the “Trademark Act of 1946”) (15 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.); or (D) a trade secret (as defined in section 1839 of title 18, United States Code)."

" ... “(1) IN GENERAL.—The legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright, or a person authorized to act on the owner's behalf, may request the clerk of any United States district court to issue a subpoena to a developer for disclosure of copies of, or records sufficient to identify with certainty, the copyrighted works, or any portion thereof, likely owned or controlled by the legal or beneficial owner that were used by the developer to train the generative artificial intelligence model, if the legal or beneficial owner or authorized person has a subjective good faith belief that the developer used some or all of 1 or more such copyrighted works to train the generative artificial intelligence model.

“(2) SUBPOENA LIMITED TO REQUESTER'S OWN COPYRIGHTED WORK.—Nothing in paragraph (1) shall be construed to authorize a legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright, or a person authorized to act on the owner's behalf, to request a subpoena for disclosure of copies of, or records sufficient to identify with certainty, copyrighted works likely owned or controlled by any person other than the legal or beneficial owner."

" ... To create an administrative subpoena process to assist copyright owners in determining which of their copyrighted works have been used in the training of artificial intelligence models."

" ... (c) put in place a policy to comply with Union law on copyright and related rights, and in particular to identify and comply with, including through state-of-the-art technologies, a reservation of rights expressed pursuant to Article 4(3) of Directive (EU) 2019/790; (d) draw up and make publicly available a sufficiently detailed summary about the content used for training of the general-purpose AI model, according to a template provided by the AI Office."

" ... The U.S. Copyright Office has determined AI-generated content is not protected by copyright. Content must be human authored to be considered protected under copyright laws."

" ... The US Copyright Office determined that art created solely by AI isn’t eligible for copyright protection. Artists can attempt to register works made with assistance from AI, but they must show significant “human authorship.” ... "

" ... Verify the Copyright of All Generated Content. Users shall verify the content they use from any Generative AI systems does not infringe any copyright laws. For example, City employees could check the copyright of text-based content with plagiarism software and the copyright of image-based content with reverse Google searches, although neither of these approaches guarantees protection against copyright infringements. If users are uncertain if content violates copyright, they should either edit the content to be original or not use it."

" ... Ownership of Generated Content. In most cases, the user owns the content they input into a Generative AI service and the information they receive as an output. The user can use the content at their discretion, in accordance with City policy and any terms and conditions he/she has agreed to. However, many Generative AI companies still retain the right to use both the input and output content for their own commercial purposes. For example, this could include a Generative AI company using City data to train their models or distributing City output data for marketing campaigns. This emphasizes the importance that only information the City is ready to make public should be entered into a Generative AI system."

" ... In these cases, copyright will only protect the human-authored aspects of the work, which are 'independent of' and do 'not affect' the copyright status of the AI-generated material itself."

" ... For example, a human may select or arrange AI-generated material in a sufficiently creative way that 'the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.' ... "

" ... The Court disagreed, holding that there was 'no doubt' the Constitution's Copyright Clause permitted photographs to be subject to copyright, 'so far as they are representatives of original intellectual conceptions of the author.' ... "

" ... In the Office's view, it is well-established that copyright can protect only material that is the product of human creativity."

" ... a number of voluntary direct and collective licensing agreements for using copyrighted works in AI training have emerged over the past several years, with others in development. Some AI systems have now been trained exclusively on licensed or public domain works. These developments demonstrate that voluntary licensing may be workable, at least in certain contexts—particularly where training is focused on valuable content that can be licensed in relatively high volumes (e.g., popular music and stock photography), or in fields where the number of copyright owners is limited. The Office recognizes, however, that practical challenges remain in many areas. The growing licensing market does not itself establish that voluntary licensing is feasible at scale for all AI training needs."

" ... the research projects they identify may well qualify as fair use and therefore would not require licenses. And the amount of monetary compensation that some copyright owners will accept may depend on contractual conditions regarding control of the use of their works."

" ... within 270 days of the date of this order, issue additional guidance to USPTO patent examiners and applicants to address other considerations at the intersection of AI and IP, which could include, as the USPTO Director deems necessary, updated guidance on patent eligibility to address innovation in AI and critical and emerging technologies; and (iii) within 270 days of the date of this order or 180 days after the United States Copyright Office of the Library of Congress publishes its forthcoming AI study that will address copyright issues raised by AI, whichever comes later, consult with the Director of the United States Copyright Office 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."

" ... The term “intellectual property” includes patents, copyrights, trademarks, or trade secrets."

" ... Models are also increasingly being used for generating creative output – some of which mimic the styles of existing creators and give rise to considerations of whether this would constitute fair use."

" ... All copyrightable works owned by the state that are created with the involvement of Generative AI must include an accompanying annotation sufficient to meet the requirements of the U.S. Copyright Office for Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence (88 FR 16190). The annotation should include at least the Generative AI technology used and a description of how it was used to create the work."

" ... Common security concerns relate to adversarial examples, data poisoning, and the exfiltration of models, training data, or other intellectual property through AI system endpoints.

Training data may also be subject to copyright and should follow applicable intellectual property rights laws."

" ... Policies and procedures are in place that address AI risks associated with third-party entities, including risks of infringement of a third-party’s intellectual property or other rights."