Should AI be treated the same way as people are when it comes to copyright law?
The New York Times's lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft highlights an uncomfortable contradiction in how we view creativity and learning. While the Times accuses these companies of copyright infringement for training AI on their content, this ignores a fundamental truth: AI systems learn exactly as humans do, by absorbing, synthesizing and transforming existing knowledge into something new.
Consider how human creators work. No writer, artist or musician exists in a vacuum. For example, without ancient Greek mythology, we wouldn't have DC's pantheon of superheroes, including cinematic staples such as Superman, Wonder Woman and Aquaman. These characters draw unmistakably clear inspiration from the likes of Zeus, Athena and Poseidon, respectively. Without the gods of Mount Olympus as inspiration, there would be no comic book heroes today to save the world (and the summer box office).
This pattern of learning, absorbing and transforming is precisely how large language models operate. They don't plagiarize or reproduce; they learn patterns and relationships from vast amounts of information, just as humans do. When a novelist reads thousands of books throughout their lifetime, those works shape their writing style, vocabulary and narrative instincts. We don't accuse them of copyright infringement because we understand that transforming influences into original expression is the essence of creativity.
Critics will argue that AI companies profit from others' work without compensation. This argument misses a crucial distinction between reference and reproduction. When large language models generate text that bears stylistic similarities to works they trained on, it's no different from a human author whose writing reflects their literary influences. The output isn't a copy, it's a new creation informed by patterns the system has learned.
Others might contend that the commercial nature of AI training sets it apart from human learning. However, this ignores how human creativity has always been commercialized. Publishing houses profit from authors whose styles developed by reading other published works. Hollywood studios earn billions from films that remix existing narrative traditions. The economy of human creativity has always involved building commercial works upon the foundation of cultural knowledge.
Moreover, this economic reality aligns perfectly with the Constitution's original intent for intellectual property. Article I, Section 8 explicitly empowers Congress "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" through copyright law — not simply to protect content creators, but to advance human knowledge and innovation. Allowing AI systems to learn from existing works furthers this constitutional purpose by fostering new economic activity and technological progress.
It's also crucial to recognize that when verbatim copying occurs in AI outputs, it almost always results from specific user prompts, not the inherent nature of the AI system itself. This highlights how large language models are tools, capable of being used responsibly or abused for copyright infringement based entirely on how users interact with them. That they can be used to violate copyrights is logically little different than how a hammer can be used as a deadly weapon. Common sense tells us that a hammer’s potential for violent assault doesn't justify treating it as an inherently dangerous weapon, as said usage represents a rare exception of its use rather than the norm.
The Sony v. Universal Studios case of 1984 illustrated this logic legally when the Supreme Court ruled that VCRs were not illegal because they had "substantial non-infringing uses," despite their potential to be used for copyright violations. This exact case gives courts the legal framework to side with AI companies today, as large language models clearly offer tremendous value entirely separate from any potential copyright concerns.
While there remains a good chance that OpenAI will emerge victorious in their legal battle, we should not rely on courts alone to reach the correct conclusion in these cases. Congress must act to clarify copyright law for the AI age, just as it did when photography and recorded music disrupted prior understandings of intellectual property.
When photography first emerged in the 19th century, courts struggled to determine whether photographs deserved copyright protection or were merely mechanical reproductions of reality. Congress eventually stepped in, recognizing photography as a creative medium deserving protection. Similarly, when player pianos and phonographs emerged, enabling mechanical reproduction of music, Congress created the compulsory licensing system in the 1909 Copyright Act rather than allowing copyright holders to block the technology entirely.
Today's situation demands similar legislative vision. Rather than allowing the risk of a judicial interpretation that strangles innovation, Congress should immediately move to establish a clear framework that recognizes AI training as fundamentally transformative and non-infringing.
Nicholas Creel is an associate professor of business law at Georgia College & State University. The views expressed are his own.
-
OpenAI urges U.S. to allow AI models to train on copyrighted material
OpenAI is asking the U.S. government to make it easier for AI companies to learn from copyrighted material, citing a need to “strengthen America’s lead” globally in advancing the technology.NBC News - Mar. 13 -
My date used AI to psychologically profile me. Is that OK?
Large language models are unaware of the offline context that sensitive information might be employed inFinancial Times - 3d -
Most Republicans do not believe CDC when it comes to bird flu
Almost 6 in 10 Americans who identify as Republican do not trust the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to provide reliable information on H5N1 bird flu, according to a new poll from ...The Hill - Mar. 13 -
Hundreds of actors urging government not to loosen copyright laws for AI
More than 420 entertainment industry insiders, led by Natasha Lyonne, signed an open letter urging the government to uphold copyright laws that apply to artificial intelligence.CBS News - Mar. 17 -
Art created autonomously by AI can't be copyrighted, federal appeals court rules
A federal appeals court ruled that art created autonomously by artificial intelligence cannot be copyrighted, saying that at least initial human authorship is required for a copyright.NBC News - 6d -
What couples need to know about desire: ‘There’s no right or healthy amount of sex’
Desire discrepancy is one of the most common reasons couples come to certified sex and relationship practitioner Georgia Grace . Solving the issue means challenging false assumptions. Get our ...The Guardian - Mar. 10 -
Fears for human rights as Peru passes ‘simply brutal’ anti-NGO law
Experts say legislation will prevent vulnerable people from accessing justice in latest government-backed crackdown. Human rights groups in Peru have voiced alarm over a controversial anti-NGO law ...The Guardian - Mar. 14 -
Over half of American adults have used an AI chatbot, survey finds
Artificial intelligence technology is becoming increasingly integral to everyday life. 52% of U.S. adults have used AI large language models like ChatGPT.NBC News - Mar. 12 -
Farmers are struggling in Europe — don’t let RFK Jr. do the same to America
Americans love to cite Europe for policy experiments, but not everything that happens on the old continent should be treated as secret knowledge which Americans lack.The Hill - Mar. 8
More from The Hill
-
Trump could be pushing South Africa closer to China
On Feb. 7, Trump issued the executive order “Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa.”The Hill - 31m -
Congress continues to seek answers on UFOs
UFO whistleblower David Grusch will be advising Missouri Rep. Eric Burlison on the issue.The Hill - 44m -
'Like a forest fire': Where large measles outbreaks will occur, according to an epidemiologist
"What is interesting about this current outbreak is the speed at which it's expanding and increasing," said Dr. William Moss, an epidemiology professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of ...The Hill - 48m -
Study links Wegovy to increased hair loss risk
Researchers assessed data from 16 million patients from 2006 to 2020 taking semaglutide-based drugs; the active ingredient in Wegovy.The Hill - 55m -
How Trump is finding workarounds to legal hurdles
There’s a theme emerging in the Trump administration’s battles in courtrooms across the country contesting an array of executive actions facing litigation. As the saying goes, if you can’t go ...The Hill - 1h
More in Politics
-
Trump signs order requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote
President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order on Tuesday that would require people to prove their citizenship when they register to vote by providing a United States passport or another ...NBC News - 17m -
Trump signs order requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote
President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order on Tuesday that would require people to prove their citizenship when they register to vote by providing a United States passport or another ...NBC News - 17m -
Trump could be pushing South Africa closer to China
On Feb. 7, Trump issued the executive order “Addressing Egregious Actions of the Republic of South Africa.”The Hill - 31m -
Congress continues to seek answers on UFOs
UFO whistleblower David Grusch will be advising Missouri Rep. Eric Burlison on the issue.The Hill - 44m -
'Like a forest fire': Where large measles outbreaks will occur, according to an epidemiologist
"What is interesting about this current outbreak is the speed at which it's expanding and increasing," said Dr. William Moss, an epidemiology professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of ...The Hill - 48m