In a wave of concern, country singers, romance novelists, video game artists, and voice actors have appealed to the U.S. government for immediate relief from the threat posed by artificial intelligence (AI) to their livelihoods. Thousands of letters, totaling close to 10,000 comments, have been submitted to the U.S. Copyright Office, highlighting the anxieties of these creative professionals.

The letters express fears of job displacement and the replication of their work through AI technology. A podcaster, emphasizing the potential replication of his voice by AI, wrote, "Please regulate AI. I'm scared." The calls for AI regulation have been met with contrasting opinions from technology companies, who are largely content with the current state that allows them to utilize published works to improve their AI systems' ability to mimic human creativity.

The U.S. Register of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter, stated in an interview that her office remains impartial while carefully considering these concerns. With the rise of generative AI tools that can produce imagery, music, video, and text, the Copyright Office is deliberating on whether copyright reforms are necessary for this new era.

Perlmutter raised the question of whether there is a threshold of human involvement in controlling the output of AI-generated content where it can be considered as human authorship. Currently, copyright laws protect human-authored works, and claims for fully machine-generated content have been summarily rejected.

One of the major concerns brought forward by the creative professions is the unauthorized use and ingestion of copyrighted human works to train AI systems. This issue has garnered significant attention, with over 9,700 comments already received by the Copyright Office. Another round of comments is due by December 6th.

Justine Bateman, an actor and filmmaker, expressed her alarm over AI models consuming a century's worth of film and TV content, which could disrupt the structure of the film industry and replace a significant portion of its workforce. She called this phenomenon "the largest copyright violation in the history of the United States" and urged the authorities to take action to prevent further harm.

Similar concerns were voiced by Lilla Zuckerman, a television showrunner, who described AI as a "plagiarism machine" and emphasized the need to safeguard human talent in entertainment before it is exploited by profit-driven companies.

The music industry also faces threats, as highlighted by country songwriter Marc Beeson. While acknowledging the positive potential of AI, Beeson cautioned that without proper parameters, it could cause irreparable damage to one of America's last true art forms.

In addition to individual concerns, major music publishers, author groups, and news organizations, including Universal Music Group, The New York Times, and The Associated Press, have echoed the worries expressed by creative professionals.

Leading tech companies such as Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI argue that their use of AI models falls under the "fair use" doctrine, which permits limited use of copyrighted material for research, education, and transformative purposes. They contend that AI training identifies patterns across a wide range of content, rather than extracting or reproducing individual works.

Tech companies have found support in previous legal cases, most notably Google's victory in legal challenges to its online book library. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld lower court rulings in 2016 that dismissed authors' claims of copyright infringement against Google's digitization of books.

However, former law professor and bestselling romance author Heidi Bond, writing under the pen name Courtney Milan, argues against this comparison. Bond highlights that Google Books obtained legitimate copies from libraries and institutions, while many AI developers engage in "outright piracy" by scraping written works.

The U.S. Copyright Office, headed by Shira Perlmutter, is actively working towards providing guidance on these matters. Perlmutter acknowledges that the situation differs in certain aspects from the Google Books case and ponders whether the fair use defense applies to AI usage.

As the U.S. Copyright Office continues to assess the impact of AI on creative professions, they will advise Congress and other relevant stakeholders on any necessary reforms to address the concerns raised.

The future of AI regulation remains uncertain, and creative professionals anxiously await the outcome, hopeful that their livelihoods and artistic contributions will be protected in this rapidly evolving landscape.