AI Coming After Us—And You

Shira Perlmutter. Library of Congress photo.

It’s easy to miss big stuff amid the chaos in Washington. Dig a little into what’s happening at the Library of Congress and you’ll find disturbing developments related to authors, artists and the march of artificial intelligence.

Publishers like us and the authors we represent work with the Library of Congress all the time. You may have heard that the Trump administration this spring fired the Librarian of Congress, Carla Hayden, for no stated reason. (She was replaced by one of the president’s criminal defense lawyers).

Less attention was paid to the firing of Shira Perlmutter, director of the U.S. Copyright Office in the Library of Congress, which is charged with protecting the intellectual property of art, books, newspapers and most of what we see in print. 

New court documents in Perlmutter’s case speak to the AI link in what's going on.

Perlmutter was fired two days after releasing a long-in-the-works report called Generative AI Training—a multipart effort taking stock of this transformative technology.

Was she was fired for putting out the report or because she wanted it public, knowing she was on the verge of dismissal? In either case, the report spells out something other than the happy talk we hear from purveyors of the technology.

“The copying involved in AI training threatens significant potential harm to the market for or value of copyrighted works,” the report asserts.

In other words, copying for purposes of "training" AI models can amount to digital thievery. And harm to the market means that writers, artists, publishers and people who create things don’t get paid.

The eBook Study Group, an alliance of authors, libraries, museums and other concerned with copyright protection, called the firings “a serious and unprecedented intrusion” by the White House into the business of Congress. (It is, after all, the Library of Congress).

“This is not just a staffing change; it is a constitutional disruption,” the Study Group said of Perlmutter’s dismissal.

“Such interference threatens the independence and credibility of the Copyright Office and sets a dangerous precedent that endangers the integrity of the entire copyright system, upon which creators, publishers, libraries, researchers, the government itself, and the public all depend.”

The White House announced last month that it is writing  “America’s AI Action Plan.”  But the Copyright Office report, citing private licensing agreements being written, concludes that government intervention is premature. 

Meanwhile, players in the AI race charge forth like early 20th century robber barons in hopes of securing vast swaths of data and, some hope, laying waste to intellectual property (IP) laws.

Jack Dorsey, founder of X, tweeted “Delete all IP law,” to which Elon Musk —who purchased the platform— replied “I agree.”

Appeals in Perlmutter’s firing continue, raising the prospect of the Library of Congress turmoil reaching the Supreme Court.

That would be unlikely by the time of the Library of Congress National Book Festival, on Saturday, Sept. 6 — featuring Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, author of Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution, among participants.