/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

← → days · ↑ ↓ browse · Enter similar · o open

President Trump's acting leaders for the Copyright Office are hostile to the tech industry and not the kind of people that generative AI proponents would want

What initially appeared to be a power play by Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to take over the US Copyright Office …

The Verge Tina Nguyen

Context & Ripple Effects

The leadership upheaval follows the administration’s dismissal of Copyright Office head Shira Perlmutter, after her office raised concerns about copyrighted material in AI training. The acting appointments make the office’s stance on that dispute more consequential for AI companies and rightsholders.

It also fits a broader pattern of installing Musk- and Thiel-aligned executives in federal technology roles, though the Copyright Office case points to an internal tension: personnel associated with the change are described as unfriendly to the tech sector rather than reliably aligned with generative-AI advocates.

First-order effects

  • Generative-AI developers and copyright owners must contend with an acting Copyright Office leadership team portrayed as more skeptical of the tech industry, increasing the immediate importance of the office’s views on training-data copyright.
  • The removal of Perlmutter and transition to acting leadership interrupt continuity at the office while its prior work had already put AI training and copyright in direct conflict.

Second-order effects

  • AI companies may need to put more weight on licensing, legal-risk assessment, and engagement with copyright stakeholders if the office’s leadership continues to challenge industry-friendly assumptions about training data.
  • The episode complicates efforts to treat a deregulatory government agenda as uniformly favorable to AI: copyright policy can produce pressure on developers even when other parts of the administration seek technology-sector alignment.

Third-order effects

  • If political appointments repeatedly reshape copyright-policy leadership, access to copyrighted training material could become a more variable, administration-dependent input for AI development.
  • The longer contest is over whether generative AI’s content supply is governed chiefly through market licensing or through expansive claims of permissible use; the office’s leadership is becoming a visible institutional lever in that contest.

The trend: AI policy is increasingly being set through control of key administrative institutions, with copyright governance emerging as a constraint on the industry’s content-commercialization model.

Discussion

  • @mollyereynolds Molly Reynolds on bluesky
    I've thought for a bit that there are 3 parts to Trump world w/ possibly divergent interests: Musk/DOGE, the “punishing what we don't like” wing, & exec power maximalists.  Who knew the illustration of this would involve...leg branch entities' appointment authorities? www.theverg…
  • @tinanguyen Tina Nguyen on bluesky
    Scoop/twist in the Library of Congress/Copyright Office firings: Trump's replacement appointees aren't from DOGE.  —  They're DOJ officials backed by MAGA copyright hawks, who are steamed that the tech right undercut them to get a generative AI critic fired.  —  www.theverge.com/…
  • @david.noll.org David Noll on bluesky
    i really like the way this Verge story contextualizes DOGE's attack on the LOC within the distinct, and longer-running, attack on the administrative state being carried out by unitary executive theorists and the Supreme Court  —  www.theverge.com/politics/666...  [image]
  • @denisehkg Denise McMuffin on bluesky
    www.theverge.com/politics/666...  But those two men, Paul Perkins and Brian Nieves, were not DOGE at all, but instead approved by the MAGA wing of the Trump coalition that aims to put tech companies in check.
  • @jtlg James Grimmelmann on bluesky
    This is why I said “I have no clue!” to the reporters who asked me to comment on the Copyright Office purge and the AI report.  —  The political motivations behind the publicly visible parts of the drama were not obvious, and we still don't have the full story.  —  www.theverge.c…
  • @reckless Nilay Patel on bluesky
    SCOOP from @tinanguyen.bsky.social: Elon's copyright coup attempt blew up after furious MAGA backlash to having AI companies train on content without paying for it www.theverge.com/politics/666...
  • @sarahjeong Sarah Jeong on bluesky
    the weirdness at the Copyright Office intensifies, with both Dems and MAGA pointing fingers at Elon Musk for the firing of Shira Perlmutter, and identifying the AI report as the reason www.theverge.com/politics/666...
  • @neilturkewitz Neil Turkewitz on x
    “It's not fair use under the copyright laws to take everyone's content & have the big tech platforms monetize it. That's the opposite of fair use. That's a copyright infringement.” —Mike Davis, President of the Article III project & a key Trump advisor https://www.theverge.com/..…
  • @jason_kint Jason Kint on x
    The Verge comes in with a massive scoop on the backstory reporting it was Musk - and Sacks - behind the scenes trying to blow up IP to train AI on behalf of his allies. This wouldn't be a surprise to anyone. /1 [image]
  • @ednewtonrex Ed Newton-Rex on x
    Oh god I hope this is true. According to The Verge: - Musk/Sacks got Perlmutter fired due to AI & copyright report - Conservative content industry were livid, lobbied heavily - Interim appointments at Library of Congress / Copyright Office end up being people “downright [image]
  • r/EnoughMuskSpam r on reddit
    Technofascists Elon Musk and David Sacks tried to replace the heads of the Copyright Office and Library of Congress so they could train AI for free. …
  • r/law r on reddit
    Elon Musk's apparent power play at the Copyright Office completely backfired