The U.S. Copyright Office has released part one of wide-ranging report on the impact of the recent artificial intelligence boom—and “digital replicas,” more commonly known as deepfakes, are the first topic of concern.
From “AI-generated musical performances to robocall impersonations of political candidates to images in pornographic videos,” the report acknowledges that “a new era of sophisticated digital replicas has arrived.” And while the technology has long existed to produce such deepfakes, the report concludes that rapid advancement of generative AI suggests that new federal legislation is needed.
“The speed, precision, and scale of AI-created digital replicas calls for prompt federal action,” the report states. “Without a robust nationwide remedy, their unauthorized publication and distribution threaten substantial harm not only in the entertainment and political arenas, but also for private individuals.”
The report comes as new legislation is being considered by Congress, including the NO FAKES Act (Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe), which was introduced into the Senate this week. Among its provisions, the report notes, the act would provide a new right “to authorize the use of the image, voice, or visual likeness of the individual in a digital replica.” The report explores arguments for the bill, as well as questions over how such a law might work, recommending that any federal law addressing digital replicas should “prioritize the protection of the livelihoods of working artists, the dignity of living persons, and the security of the public from fraud and misinformation regarding current events.”
In a statement to the Human Artistry Campaign, AAP president and CEO Maria Pallante praised the introduction of the NO FAKES Act, calling it "a major win for the public."
The report is the first of several parts of a broad inquiry into AI technologies initiated by the Copyright Office last year. Subsequent parts are set to address other thorny issues associated with AI, the Copyright Office said, including “the copyrightability of works created using generative AI, training of AI models on copyrighted works, licensing considerations, and allocation of any potential liability.”
In a foreword to the first part of the report, U.S. Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter addressed the Copyright Office’s goals in exploring the rise of AI technology, calling AI the “latest chapter” in copyright’s “symbiotic relationship” with technology.
“By the fall of 2022, millions of Americans were utilizing generative AI systems and services to produce an astonishing array of expressive material, including visual art, text, and music,” Perlmutter writes. “Almost weekly, tremendous strides have been announced in the technology’s capabilities. Artists have harnessed the power of AI to find new ways to express themselves and new ways of connecting with audiences.”
At the same time, she notes, “AI raises fundamental questions for copyright law and policy, which many see as existential,” adding: “To what extent will AI-generated content replace human authorship? How does human creativity differ in nature from what AI systems can generate, now or in the future? What does this mean for the incentive-based foundation of the U.S. copyright system? In what ways can the technology serve as a valuable tool to amplify human creativity and ultimately promote science and the arts? How do we respect and reward human creators without impeding technological progress?”
