Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Generative AI Training may not Qualify for the Fair Use Defense

By Daniel Lass on May 15, 2025
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
All famous AI chat apps like Character.AI, Perplexity, Claude, Copilot, Chat GPT, Deepseek, Gemini with Appstore icon on an iphone screen.
Saradasish Pradhan, Unsplash

Last week, the Copyright Office released the third and final part of its report exploring copyright-related issues posed by artificial intelligence (AI). Unlike the first two parts, the third was released as a “pre-publication” version. It was published less than a day after Dr. Carla Hayden, the Librarian of Congress, was fired by President Trump and a day before Shira Perlmutter, the Register of Copyrights, was fired by President Trump. Building off its earlier parts, the latest publication focuses on how copyright law and the fair use defense should be applied to companies that use copyrighted works to train AI models.

The report concluded that companies presumptively infringe the copyright protections of others when they copy materials to use in training data. Additionally, the report concluded that the numerical parameters of the model can also be infringing when it can reproduce the copyrighted work as a memorized example.

However, the fair use defense permits copying another’s work. Many uses of copyrighted works by an AI model are likely transformative. However, the Office concluded that commercializing copyrighted works in training data to compete with the original works is unlikely to fit the fair use exception. AI models rapidly create new works that imitate a creator’s style. The Office concluded that this market dilution weighs against the fair use argument for generative AI companies. 

Recognizing that the copyrighted data is needed in the training data, the report concluded by exploring different licensing frameworks that companies can use to acquire the data. The report does not recommend that the government intervene to establish a licensing regime right away, but that the market should continue to develop.

It is unclear if the Trump administration will rescind the report or issue a final report with changes. However, companies developing AI tools should likely consider the report regardless of the administration’s actions.

Tags: AI
Photo of Daniel Lass Daniel Lass

Daniel J. Lass is a member of the Data Privacy + Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence Teams, advising clients on compliance with state and federal privacy laws. He is also a member of the Intellectual Property + Technology group with a concentration on the…

Daniel J. Lass is a member of the Data Privacy + Cybersecurity and Artificial Intelligence Teams, advising clients on compliance with state and federal privacy laws. He is also a member of the Intellectual Property + Technology group with a concentration on the preparation and prosecution of patent applications in electro-mechanical and mechanical-related areas and other disciplines.  Read his full rc.com bio here.

Read more about Daniel LassEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Intellectual Property, Technology and AI
  • Blog:
    Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Insider
  • Organization:
    Robinson & Cole LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo