Copyright law debate centers on transparency and GenAI training data disclosures

The California Assembly Judiciary Committee meeting on May 6, 2025, focused on the implications of proposed legislation concerning copyright law and its intersection with artificial intelligence (AI) training. Key discussions highlighted concerns about the balance between transparency and the protection of proprietary information.

Committee members emphasized the importance of copyright law, particularly regarding its impact on various stakeholders, including creators and businesses. A representative expressed that while they appreciate the amendments being considered, there remains a fundamental disagreement with the bill's intent. They argued that the legislation does not genuinely promote transparency but rather seeks to determine whether using copyrighted material for training generative AI constitutes fair use—a matter they believe should be resolved by the courts.

The discussion also referenced Assembly Bill 2013, which was signed into law six months prior and is set to take effect on January 1, 2026. This bill mandates high-level disclosures about the datasets used for training AI, including whether these datasets contain copyrighted material. The representative pointed out that significant amendments were negotiated to protect sensitive information, arguing that excessive disclosure could expose companies to risks, including trade secrets being compromised.

Furthermore, the meeting raised concerns about the contradictory nature of current legislative efforts. While one set of bills addresses antitrust issues and penalizes the sharing of publicly available data on pricing, the proposed bill would require detailed disclosures about AI training data, which the representative argued should also be considered sensitive information.

In conclusion, the committee's discussions underscored the ongoing debate over copyright, transparency, and the protection of proprietary information in the rapidly evolving landscape of AI technology. The outcome of these legislative efforts could have significant implications for both the tech industry and copyright holders in California.