Tech

Rewriting Copyright Law for Generative AI Would Hurt Everyone

Read full article at source ↗

Based on a feed excerpt; full article content has not been acquired. Source evidence retrieved 31/10/2026, 00:20:24 UTC.

Briefings

EFF filed an amicus brief in In re OpenAI arguing that narrowing fair use rights would harm billions of unrepresented people, including researchers, journalists, and people with disabilities. The brief warns that if courts rewrite copyright law to limit fair use, it would impede essential public work like medical research and investigative journalism while threatening daily internet activities. The evidence indicates that plaintiffs' arguments about AI training infringing on rights are unfounded, as courts have already found fair use in cases where copyrighted works were used to train generative AI models. The brief also critiques mandatory licensing proposals, noting they would entrench Big Tech advantages and fail to help underpaid creators. The article notes that while some creators worry about AI competition, copyright law exists to stimulate creativity, not protect first-mover authors.

Key points

• EFF filed an amicus brief in In re OpenAI to defend public rights against proposed copyright law changes that would narrow fair use.
• The brief argues that limiting fair use would impede essential public work like medical research and investigative journalism.

Context

EFF is defending public rights in generative AI lawsuits where creators and publishers sue large AI companies for training models on copyrighted works. The brief explains that if fair use gets narrowed, it will impede work that benefits the public, like medical research and investigative journalism, and even limit access to privacy protection tools.

Limitations

Evidence is limited to EFF's amicus brief and the article's summary of court cases; specific numbers on affected users or financial impacts are not provided. The brief states that if plaintiffs prevail, courts would have to rewrite copyright law, but does not specify the outcome or timeline. The article cites Professor Lawrence Lessig and Cory Doctorow for general critiques of licensing, but does not provide direct quotes or specific data on licensing costs or benefits.

Generated by Bittrees-hosted qwen35-2b sha256:aaf42c8b7c3c on 31/10/2026, 00:21:51 UTC. Based on publisher-provided feed evidence; may not cover the full original article. Check the source for details.

View archived briefing on IPFS
bafybeierzwsdjhpy7o3huaejdqphqe247okcdja3eieep5udl7hywlo2lq