TLDR: The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and the Chamber of Progress have jointly filed an amicus brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Doe v. GitHub. They argue that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s (DMCA) copyright management information (CMI) removal provision should not be broadly interpreted to impede artificial intelligence (AI) development, warning of severe consequences for generative AI if the court rules otherwise.
Washington D.C. – In a significant move for the future of artificial intelligence, the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and the Chamber of Progress have submitted an amicus brief to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the ongoing case of Doe v. GitHub. The brief contends that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s (DMCA) provision concerning the removal of copyright management information (CMI) should not be applied in a manner that stifles the advancement of AI technologies.
The core argument presented by the two prominent tech industry associations is that the DMCA’s CMI removal provision was originally intended to prevent the creation of identical copies of copyrighted works from which CMI had been stripped. It was not designed, they assert, to impede the creation of entirely new works, which is a fundamental aspect of generative AI. The brief highlights that common online activities, such as creating and sharing memes or altering images, could inadvertently remove CMI, exposing individuals to legal risks under a broad interpretation of the law.
Given that generative AI services process hundreds of millions of queries daily, the outcome of this case carries substantial implications for AI users and developers. A broad interpretation of the DMCA’s CMI provision, the brief warns, could effectively halt generative AI development in its tracks and make it ‘nearly impossible for startups to proceed with many types of AI development.’
Josh Landau, Senior Counsel for Innovation Policy at CCIA, emphasized the critical nature of the case, stating, ‘This case involves an important principle that will impact how AI develops in the U.S. and how useful it will be. The DMCA’s CMI removal provision was designed to prevent creating exact copies of copyrighted works while removing their CMI, not to stop the creation of new works. Interpreting the law that way would be dangerous and would make it nearly impossible for startups to proceed with many types of AI development. We’re asking the court to uphold the previous court order dismissing the claims against GitHub.’
Also Read:
- Canada Navigates AI Copyright Landscape Amidst OpenAI’s Legal Battle with Publishers
- AI’s Dual Impact: Reshaping Intellectual Property Crime Through ‘Starjacking’ and Advanced Reverse Engineering
The CCIA, an international, not-for-profit trade association, has advocated for open markets, open systems, and open networks for over five decades. Its members collectively employ more than 1.6 million workers, invest over $100 billion in research and development, and contribute trillions of dollars in productivity to the global economy, underscoring the significant economic stakes involved in this legal precedent.
