Fair Use Defense Under Pressure from Executive Branch Intervention #
- U.S. Department of Justice Files Legal Brief Urging Court to Find AI Training to Be Fair Use (Publishers Weekly) — In a significant and unusual move, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a “Statement of Interest” in the New York Times v. OpenAI lawsuit on September 4, 2026. The brief argues that training large language models constitutes a transformative fair use and that requiring paid licenses would stifle innovation and create an oligopoly for the largest tech firms, putting U.S. AI companies at a competitive disadvantage. The filing directly counters the “market dilution” argument that has been central to recent lawsuits by publishers, asserting that constraining AI development based on a “misunderstanding of fair use” would hinder American economic and scientific progress.
China Signals Intent to Create New AI-Specific Copyright Rules #
- China’s 15th Five-Year Plan for Copyright Work Calls for AI Training Data and Generative AI Rules (The National Law Review) — In August 2026, China’s National Copyright Administration released its five-year plan (2026-2030), which explicitly identifies AI as an area requiring new rulemaking. The plan directs authorities to “promote the establishment of a fair use system for AI training data” and to “research and draft generative AI copyright rules.” This signals a formal recognition that existing laws are insufficient and sets a clear policy goal to create a specific legal framework for both AI training data and the outputs of generative models, including a role for collective management organizations in licensing data.
- Emerging pattern: The executive branches of major governments are now actively intervening in AI copyright disputes, moving beyond legislative proposals to filing briefs in active court cases (US DOJ) and issuing national strategic plans that mandate future AI-specific copyright regulations (China). This indicates a new phase where the issue is being treated as a matter of national industrial policy and economic competitiveness, not just a legal question for the courts to decide.
- Gap: While there is extensive coverage of lawsuits and high-level national policy announcements (like those from the US and China), there is a lack of substantive reporting on the progress or failure of more nuanced, multi-stakeholder efforts to create functional, industry-wide solutions, such as the UK’s attempt at a voluntary code of practice which reportedly failed.
- Source suggestion: The National Law Review and Publishers Weekly provided specific, policy-oriented coverage that was distinct from the more common tech-focused reporting. These could be valuable sources for tracking the specifics of regulatory and legal filings.