Congress Just Rushed Through a Disastrous Copyright Office Overhaul; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), June 10, 2026

 JOE MULLIN , Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Congress Just Rushed Through a Disastrous Copyright Office Overhaul; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)

"In a voice vote earlier this week, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 6028, the “Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act.” The legislation is presented as a technical reorganization of some government agencies, but it’s much more than that. 

H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office, and not in a good way. The bill removes the Library of Congress’ current supervisory role over the Copyright Office, transfers several powers directly to the Register of Copyrights, and makes the Register a presidential appointee, confirmed by the Senate. 

These changes would make an office that’s already hugely influential in copyright and tech policy much more political. EFF first explained why that’s a terrible idea when it came up nearly a decade ago. This bill, like the older one, weakens the few public-interest checks and balances that do exist.  We hope the Senate promptly rejects this bill."

BGOV Bill Analysis: H.R. 6028, Library, Copyright Appointments; Bloomberg Government, June 8, 2026

 Greg Trial, Bloomberg Government; BGOV Bill Analysis: H.R. 6028, Library, Copyright Appointments

"The librarian of Congress would be appointed by House and Senate leadership rather than the president under H.R. 6028, which also would make the head of the US Copyright Office a presidential appointee. 

The measure would move the US Copyright Office out from under the supervision of the Library of Congress to clarify its executive branch functions. It also would make the director of the Government Publishing Office a congressionally appointed position. 

While the Library of Congress is a part of the legislative branch, the librarian has been a presidential appointee since the position was established in 1802."

House Passes Bill to Move Copyright Office to Executive Branch; Bloomberg Law, June 8, 2026

 Kyle Jahner, Bloomberg Law; House Passes Bill to Move Copyright Office to Executive Branch

"The House passed a bill Monday that would largely divorce the Copyright Office from the Library of Congress, one step closer to granting the president the ability to appoint and fire the register of copyrights.

House lawmakers passed the Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act (H.R. 6028; BGOV Bill Analysis) by voice vote, sending the bill to the Senate. It would allow the president rather than the librarian of Congress to choose the register of copyrights and change how appointments are made for multiple legislative agencies."

Can AI Author Copyrightable Work? The Supreme Court Just Declined to Say Yes; JD Supra, June 4, 2026

Kayla Ganir, Benjamin Greenberg, JD Supra ; Can AI Author Copyrightable Work? The Supreme Court Just Declined to Say Yes

"By denying certiorari in the Thaler Case, the Supreme Court left intact several key principles flowing from the D.C. Circuit’s application of the Copyright Act’s human authorship requirement:

• A work generated autonomously by an AI system, without meaningful human contribution, lacks the human authorship necessary to qualify for copyright protection.
• The human authorship requirement does not impose a blanket prohibition against works created with the assistance of AI—rather, it requires that the author of that work be a human being and not the machine itself.
• Whether a work created with the help of AI is registerable depends on the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the work’s creation, including how the AI tool operates and at what stage of the creative process it is used, and the overall extent of human creativity involved.
• The manner in which an applicant describes the role of AI in a copyright application will influence how the Copyright Office will assess the work under the human authorship requirement.

These principles serve as an important reminder that artists and creators should carefully consider the extent to which they rely on AI in their creative processes if they intend to seek copyright protection for their work. The Thaler Case underscores that while AI may offer innovative creative tools, protection under the Copyright Act remains grounded in human creativity, input, and judgment."

A BILL MOVING THROUGH CONGRESS COULD CHANGE WHO CONTROLS THE US COPYRIGHT OFFICE. HERE’S WHY IT MATTERS FOR THE MUSIC BUSINESS.; Music Business Worldwide, June 4, 2026

 MURRAY STASSEN , Music Business Worldwide; A BILL MOVING THROUGH CONGRESS COULD CHANGE WHO CONTROLS THE US COPYRIGHT OFFICE. HERE’S WHY IT MATTERS FOR THE MUSIC BUSINESS.

"The bill arrives in the middle of an ongoing fight over the US Copyright Office and the firing of its director.

In May 2025, the Trump administration fired top copyright official Shira Perlmutter, a day after her office released a report concluding that training AI on copyrighted works qualifies as fair use in some circumstances but not others.

The administration had first removed Carla D. Hayden, the Librarian of Congress, and installed Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche as acting Librarian, who then moved to replace Perlmutter with Department of Justice official Paul Perkins.

Perlmutter sued the administration, arguing that only the Librarian of Congress, not the President, has the power to appoint or remove the Register of Copyrights.

A federal appeals court reinstated Perlmutter in September 2025, and she remains in the role while the legal battle continues.

That fight turns on the same question Griffith‘s bill addresses: whether the Register of Copyrights is an executive or a legislative officer...

Running alongside the legislation is the unresolved Perlmutter case.

The Supreme Court declined to act on her firing in late 2025, leaving Perlmutter in place while it weighs related disputes over the President’s power to remove officials.

Both the bill and the lawsuit circle the same question – whether the Register answers to the President or to Congress.

Griffith says a Senate-confirmed Register with a fixed term would give the office steadier leadership and clearer oversight.

Critics counter that a presidential appointee would politicize copyright and AI policy, and could disrupt the registration and deposit systems the Library of Congress depends on."

Artist Sues Copyright Office Over its Refusal to Register His AI-Enhanced Photo; PetaPixel, May 23, 2026

Matt Growcoot, PetaPixel; Artist Sues Copyright Office Over its Refusal to Register His AI-Enhanced Photo

"After having his registration request rejected by the U.S. Copyright Office, the author of an image that combined a photograph with Vincent Van Gogh’s Starry Night is suing.

PetaPixel reported back in December 2023 that the Copyright Office had rejected Ankit Sahni’s bid to have his artwork officially registered. Now, a report by Copyright Lately reveals that Sahni, via his company Suryast U.S. Enterprises LLC, has filed a lawsuit in the Central District of California challenging the Office’s decision."

US Copyright Office Wants to Increase Cost to Register Photos by 55%; PetaPixel, May 5, 2026

 JARON SCHNEIDER, PetaPixel; US Copyright Office Wants to Increase Cost to Register Photos by 55%

"The US Copyright Office has proposed a substantial increase to the cost to register photos, citing rising costs and inflation. It argues the cost is still negligible, but critics say the Office is out of touch with reality.

In March, the Office issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) where it suggested substantial increases to its fees, including increases of more than 50% for group registration of photographs and approximately 268% for updates to news websites. 

“The Office has determined that fees should be raised an average of 43% to account for increases in the cost of providing services. This reflects both historic inflation since the last fee study and anticipated inflation over the next three years,” the NPRM states. “The Office estimates that revenues generated by these proposed fees would be roughly $51 million per year over the next five years (compared to the current schedule’s projected $41 million per year), and would achieve approximately 53% projected cost recovery during the first year of implementation.”"

Taking Copyright Out to the Ball Game: A Closer Look at Baseball’s Most Famous Tunes; Library of Congress Blogs: Copyright Creativity at Work, March 26, 2026

Nicole McNew Chen, Library of Congress Blogs: Copyright Creativity at Work; Taking Copyright Out to the Ball Game: A Closer Look at Baseball’s Most Famous Tunes

"In 1908, lyricist Jack Norworth and composer Albert Von Tilzer wrote what would become one of the most recognized and most sung musical works in the United States: “Take Me Out to the Ball Game.” In a relatively short period, it was performed for the first time, registered with the Copyright Office, and published in a series of sheet music depicting vaudeville stars on the covers. The song was an instant hit, though it wouldn’t become the baseball theme we know today until much later. With Opening Day and the start of the 2026 Major League Baseball (MLB) season, we’re looking at the history of the song and copyright’s connection to America’s favorite pastime." 

Organizations Warn Fast-Track of Bill to Separate Copyright Office from Library of Congress Would Be a ‘Grave Mistake’; IP Watchdog, March 18, 2026

 EILEEN MCDERMOTT, IP Watchdog; Organizations Warn Fast-Track of Bill to Separate Copyright Office from Library of Congress Would Be a ‘Grave Mistake'

"Spurred by reports that House leaders are trying to fast-track a bill to separate the U.S. Copyright Office from the Library of Congress, a coalition of consumer rights, industry, open internet and library groups has again sent a letter to the House Committee on Administration urging it to consider the bill on the regular timeline to avoid “unintended consequences.” A full committee markup of the bill is scheduled for tomorrow, March 18,

H.R. 6028, the Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act, would change the procedures for appointing and removing the Librarian of Congress, the Director of the Government Publishing Office (GPO), and the Register of Copyrights. Instead of being appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, the Librarian and Director of the GPO would be appointed by a “bipartisan congressional commission” and could only be removed from office by a majority vote of the majority and minority leaders of the House of Representatives and the Senate."

Nielsen's Gracenote sues OpenAI for copyright infringement; Axios, March 10, 2026

 Sara Fischer, Axios; Nielsen's Gracenote sues OpenAI for copyright infringement

"How it works: Gracenote employs hundreds of editors who use human insight and judgment to create millions of narrative descriptions, original video descriptors, unique identifiers and other program identifiers that TV providers and other clients can use to help customers discover content. 

For example, Gracenote editors described HBO's "Game of Thrones" as "the depiction of two power families — kings and queens, knights and renegades, liars and honest men — playing a deadly game of control of the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros, and to sit atop the Iron Throne."

In the lawsuit, Gracenote alleges OpenAI scraped and used a near-exact copy of that descriptor when prompted by a ChatGPT user to describe "Game of Thrones." 

It provides several other examples where, with minimal prompting, OpenAI's various ChatGPT models recite large portions of Gracenote's program descriptions verbatim. 

Between the lines: Gracenote's entire Programs Database, which includes its metadata and the proprietary relational map its editors use to connect that data, is registered with the U.S. Copyright Office."

Tillis and Schiff Want Answers from ALI on Mass Resignations Around Latest Copyright Restatement Project; IP Watchdog, February 20, 2026

 EILEEN MCDERMOTT, IP Watchdog; Tillis and Schiff Want Answers from ALI on Mass Resignations Around Latest Copyright Restatement Project

"Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Adam Schiff (D-CA), the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, respectively, sent a letter on Thursday to Director of the American Law Institute (ALI) Diane Wood asking for answers to 14 questions about the latest Copyright Restatement Project.

The letter follows mass resignations from the project last year over concerns about the final approved product. Specifically, key copyright proponents resigned over what one of those who resigned, Copyright Alliance CEO Keith Kupferschmid, referred to as “a general undercurrent of anti-copyright sentiment that…manifests itself through a disproportionate focus on atypical court decisions that limit the scope of copyright protection.”

There has been vocal criticism of the project from copyright circles, including the Copyright Office, for years."

Adam Schiff And John Curtis Introduce Bill To Require Tech To Disclose Copyrighted Works Used In AI Training Models; Deadline, February 10, 2026

 Ted Johnson, Deadline; Adam Schiff And John Curtis Introduce Bill To Require Tech To Disclose Copyrighted Works Used In AI Training Models

"Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Sen. John Curtis (R-UT) are introducing a bill that touches on one of the hottest Hollywood-tech debates in the development of AI: The use of copyrighted works in training models.

The Copyright Labeling and Ethical AI Reporting Act would require companies file a notice with the Register of Copyrights that detail the copyrighted works used to train datasets for an AI model. The notice would have to be filed before a new model is publicly released, and would apply retroactively to models already available to consumers.

The Copyright Office also would be required to establish a public database of the notices filed. There also would be civil penalties for failure to disclose the works used."

Beware of Copyright Scams: How to Spot Fraud and Protect Yourself; Library of Congress Blogs, Copyright Creativity at Work, February 5, 2025

 George Thuronyi, Library of Congress Blogs, Copyright Creativity at Work; Beware of Copyright Scams: How to Spot Fraud and Protect Yourself

"Fraud exists in many forms, and the copyright arena is no exception. Creators, businesses, and members of the public engage online with copyright law, registration systems, and licensing practices. Bad actors sometimes exploit misunderstandings about how copyright works and how the U.S. Copyright Office operates. Scams involving copyright can be convincing, costly, and stressful, but knowing how they work is the first step toward avoiding them.

This post explains the U.S. Copyright Office’s role, describes common types of copyright-related fraud, outlines why these schemes are harmful, and offers practical steps to take if you suspect fraud."

Copyright Office Doubles Down on AI Authorship Stance in the Midjourney Case; The Fashion Law (TFL), January 23, 2026

 TFL, The Fashion Law (TFL); Copyright Office Doubles Down on AI Authorship Stance in the Midjourney Case

"The U.S. Copyright Office is standing firm in its position that works generated by artificial intelligence (“AI”), even when refined or curated by a human user, do not qualify for copyright protection unless the human author clearly limits their claim to their own original contributions. In a newly filed response and cross-motion for summary judgment, the Office is asking a federal court in Colorado to deny artist Jason Allen’s motion for summary judgment and uphold its refusal to register the work at issue, arguing that the dispute turns on the Copyright Act’s long-established human authorship requirement and not hostility toward AI."

AI companies will fail. We can salvage something from the wreckage; The Guardian, January 18, 2026

 Cory Doctorow, The Guardian; AI companies will fail. We can salvage something from the wreckage

"The growth narrative of AI is that AI will disrupt labor markets. I use “disrupt” here in its most disreputable tech-bro sense.

The promise of AI – the promise AI companies make to investors – is that there will be AI that can do your job, and when your boss fires you and replaces you with AI, he will keep half of your salary for himself and give the other half to the AI company.

That is the $13tn growth story that Morgan Stanley is telling. It’s why big investors are giving AI companies hundreds of billions of dollars. And because they are piling in, normies are also getting sucked in, risking their retirement savings and their family’s financial security.

Now, if AI could do your job, this would still be a problem. We would have to figure out what to do with all these unemployed people.

But AI can’t do your job. It can help you do your job, but that does not mean it is going to save anyone money...

After more than 20 years of being consistently wrong and terrible for artists’ rights, the US Copyright Office has finally done something gloriously, wonderfully right. All through this AI bubble, the Copyright Office has maintained – correctly – that AI-generated works cannot be copyrighted, because copyright is exclusively for humans. That is why the “monkey selfie” is in the public domain. Copyright is only awarded to works of human creative expression that are fixed in a tangible medium.

And not only has the Copyright Office taken this position, they have defended it vigorously in court, repeatedly winning judgments to uphold this principle.

The fact that every AI-created work is in the public domain means that if Getty or Disney or Universal or Hearst newspapers use AI to generate works – then anyone else can take those works, copy them, sell them or give them away for nothing. And the only thing those companies hate more than paying creative workers, is having other people take their stuff without permission...

AI is a bubble and bubbles are terrible.

Bubbles transfer the life savings of normal people who are just trying to have a dignified retirement to the wealthiest and most unethical people in our society, and every bubble eventually bursts, taking their savings with it."

U.S. Copyright Office Announces Webinar on Copyright Essentials for Filmmakers; U.S. Copyright Office, January 8, 2026

 U.S. Copyright Office ; U.S. Copyright Office Announces Webinar on Copyright Essentials for Filmmakers

"The U.S. Copyright Office invites you to register to attend the upcoming online webinar, Lights, Camera, Action: Copyright Essentials for Filmmakers, on February 4 at 1:00 p.m. eastern time. This event continues our educational series designed to teach copyright basics and key concepts to creators within various disciplines.

In this session, join us as the Copyright Office discusses what filmmakers, including producers, directors, and screenwriters, should know about copyright. We will answer commonly asked questions, review educational resources and registration options, and share how the Copyright Office’s Public Information Office can assist along the way. 

Speakers:

• Miriam Lord, Associate Register of Copyrights and Director of Public Information and Education
• Laura Kaiser, Attorney-Advisor, Office of Public Information and Education"

Year in Review: The U.S. Copyright Office; Library of Congress Blogs: Copyright Creativity at Work, December 29, 2025

 George Thuronyi , Library of Congress Blogs: Copyright Creativity at Work; Year in Review: The U.S. Copyright Office

"Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office

As the year draws to a close, I am pleased to recognize an impressive slate of accomplishments at the U.S. Copyright Office. Despite some challenges, including a lengthy government shutdown, the Office continued to produce high-quality work and reliable service to the public—from policy analyses to technology updates; efficient registration, recordation and deposit; and education and outreach. I am grateful for the opportunity to lead such a skilled and dedicated staff.

A central policy focus of the year was further work on the Office’s comprehensive artificial intelligence initiative. In January, we published Part 2 of our report, Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, addressing the copyrightability of works generated using AI. In May, we released a pre-publication version of Part 3, addressing the ingestion of copyrighted works for generative AI training.

A particularly exciting development has been in the area of IT modernization: the launch of more components of the Enterprise Copyright System (ECS). The Office engaged in a successful limited pilot with members of the public of both the eDeposit upload functionality and our most-used registration form, the Standard Application. The development teams are implementing the feedback received, and work has begun on the first ECS group registration application. We also launched the ECS licensing component, which improves the Office’s internal capabilities in administering section 111 of the Copyright Act.

Another ECS component, the new and improved Copyright Public Records System (CPRS), replaced our legacy system as the official Office record in June. More and more pre-1978 historical public records have been digitized and published, with 19,135 copyright record books now available online, amounting to more than 72 percent of the total collection.

The Office also made strides in administration and public service. Our small claims court, the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), completed its third full year, offering a more accessible option for resolving copyright disputes below a certain monetary value. The Office published a rule expediting the process for obtaining a certification of a final determination and initiated a study of the CCB’s operations to be delivered to Congress in 2026.

Our public information and education programs continued to grow. The Office hosted or participated in 190 events and speaking engagements and assisted the public, in both English and Spanish, with responses to 247,484 inquiries in-person and by phone, email, and other communications. We launched a new Registration Toolkit and a Copyright for Kids activity sheet. In September, the Office hosted the International Copyright Institute, our premier weeklong training event for foreign copyright officials, coproduced with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

This fall, we responded to a Congressional request on issues relating to performance rights organizations (PROs). And earlier in December, we announced a new group registration option for two-dimensional artwork, responding to the needs of visual artists. The Office also has taken forward the periodic review, mandated by the Music Modernization Act, of the mechanical licensing collective (MLC) and digital licensee coordinator (DLC), to be completed in 2026.

On the litigation front, the Office worked with the Department of Justice to develop and articulate positions in copyright-related cases. One major win was an appellate decision affirming the Office’s rejection of an application to register a work claimed to be produced entirely by artificial intelligence. The D.C. Circuit agreed with our view that human authorship is required for copyright protection.

Collaboration with and advising other federal agencies was again a key part of our interagency work in the international arena. This included participating in WIPO meetings on copyright and contributing to the U.S. Trade Representative’s annual Special 301 Report.

Concurrent with all of this activity, the Office’s provision of our regular services continued apace. Despite furloughs during the six-week lapse in appropriations, we issued 415,780 registrations and recorded 12,310 documents containing 5,704,306 works in fiscal year 2025. All the while, we maintained historically low processing times. We also received and transferred 503,389 copyright deposits, worth more than $57.8 million, to Library of Congress collections.

The Copyright Office remains committed to advancing copyright law and policy and supporting stakeholders in the creation and use of works of authorship. The work of the past year demonstrates the value of a resilient institution, grounded in expertise and public service. We look forward to further achievements in 2026."

Supreme Court Defers Ruling on Trump’s Effort to Oust Copyright Official; The New York Times, November 26, 2025

 Ann E. Marimow, The New York Times ; Supreme Court Defers Ruling on Trump’s Effort to Oust Copyright Official

"The Supreme Court on Wednesday deferred a decision about whether President Trump could remove the government’s top copyright official until after the justices resolved a pair of related cases testing the president’s power to fire independent regulators.

The court’s order is a placeholder and means that Shira Perlmutter, the head of the U.S. Copyright Office, can remain in her role as an adviser to Congress at least until January. The order represents a rare departure from recent cases in which the conservative majority has allowed Mr. Trump to immediately remove agency leaders while litigation over their status continues in the lower courts.

The justices said they were putting off a decision in Ms. Perlmutter’s case until after the court heard arguments in December and January in cases testing the president’s authority to fire other government officials, despite laws generally prohibiting their dismissals that were meant to protect them from political interference."

Disney has lost Roger Rabbit: Termination of Transfer is the most pro-artist form of copyright.; Medium, November 18, 2025

Cory Doctorow, Medium; Disney has lost Roger Rabbit

Termination of Transfer is the most pro-artist form of copyright.

"Gary K Wolf is the author of a fantastic 1981 novel called Who Censored Roger Rabbit? which Disney licensed and turned into an equally fantastic 1988 live action/animated hybrid movie called Who Framed Roger Rabbit? But despite the commercial and critical acclaim of the movie, Disney hasn’t made any feature-length sequels.

This is a nightmare scenario for a creator: you make a piece of work that turns out to be incredibly popular, but you’ve licensed it to a kind of absentee landlord who owns the rights but refuses to exercise them. Luckily, the copyright system contains a provision designed to rescue creative workers who fall into this trap: “Termination of Transfer.”

“Termination of Transfer” was introduced via the 1976 Copyright Act. It allows creators to unilaterally cancel the copyright licenses they have signed over to others, by waiting 35 years and then filing some paperwork with the US Copyright Office."

Photographer sues Rice after Coffeehouse uses copyrighted muffin photo; Rice Thresher, October 28, 2025

Noah Berz , Rice Thresher; Photographer sues Rice after Coffeehouse uses copyrighted muffin photo

[Kip Currier: Another cautionary tale to not "scrape" stuff from the Internet and use it for one's commercial business.

(Oh, wait...that's what Big Tech did with billions of copyrighted works they "scraped" from the Web and pirate book libraries to develop their proprietary IP-protected AI products, too, right?)

At any rate, this "federal copyright-registered blueberry muffin photo" story is another reminder that it'll save you money, time, and possible reputational damage to do one of the following: take your own photo of a blueberry muffin; hire someone to do it; license a photo; or ask permission to use it.

And if you do use a photo for your business venture, give the photographer/copyright creator attribution...

Like this photo I took of my mother's delicious Iron Skillet Blueberry Scones!

[Excerpt]

"A lawsuit has been filed against Rice, accusing Rice Coffeehouse of using a copyrighted photograph without permission to advertise on their Instagram page and website. 

The Oct. 17 complaint was filed on behalf of Meggan Hill, a photographer and chef who posts her recipes online. The photo in question is a blueberry muffin photo, featured on Hill’s website with an accompanying recipe.

The lawsuit was filed in a Houston federal district court by Hill’s attorney, Layla Nguyen of SRipLaw, an intellectual property law firm based in Boca Raton, Florida. According to the case briefing, Hill tried to notify the university of her allegations twice before suing but received no response. 

“To date, the parties have failed to resolve this matter,” the briefing reads. “Rice failed to respond to any communications.”

The lawsuit alleges that Chaus copied Hill’s photograph titled “Blueberry Muffins - Culinary Hill 1200x800” from the internet and displayed it online to promote the addition of blueberry muffins to their menu. 

In the lawsuit, Hill claims she discovered the photograph on the Chaus website on Jan. 7 — over a year after she registered the image with the Register of Copyrights. Hill allegedly reached out to Rice with her complaint on Jan. 29 and Feb. 28 before filing the suit."