Living in a world of AI: How we can better protect our rights

12.05.2025

You see an error in the text - select the fragment and press Ctrl + Enter

For several years now, discussions about AI and copyright have remained among the most talked-about topics at professional book fairs and congresses. Chytomo has summarized the key points from the panel “AI and Copyright: Policy Developments in the UK and the US,” featuring Maria A. Pallante, President and CEO of the Association of American Publishers, and Dan Conway, CEO of the Publishers Association — just in case you were among those who couldn’t get into one of the most crowded events at this year’s London Book Fair.

Maria A. Pallante is a renowned expert in intellectual property law and has been serving as the President and CEO of the AAP since January 2017. Prior to her role at AAP, she was the Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office from 2011 to 2016. During her tenure, she led significant efforts in statutory and regulatory analysis, advised Congress on copyright issues, and represented the U.S. in international intellectual property negotiations. As the leader of the AAP, she has been actively engaged in addressing the challenges and opportunities presented by AI in the publishing industry. She has regularly emphasized the need for clear principles and policies regarding AI, focusing on ethical considerations such as authenticity, accuracy, provenance, and objectives. Pallante recognizes AI as a paradigm shift that cannot be reversed, similar to the impact of the internet, and thus requires a comprehensive approach to ensure its benefits are realized while minimizing its risks.

Dan Conway, the CEO of the Publishers Association (PA) in the UK, previously led the association’s external affairs work, serving as the principal political spokesperson for the publishing industry. He has regularly been vocal about how AI challenges the publishing sector, particularly regarding copyright infringement by Large Language Models (LLMs). Conway has warned that LLM copyright infringements are occurring on a massive scale. He emphasizes that these models are not compliant with IP law as they collect, store, and handle copyrighted content without proper licensing. Therefore, he advocates for transparency regulations to ensure that AI usage is ethical and safe. He believes that big tech should pay for the creative content used to train AI models, just as they pay for other operational costs.

Last year, Conway called for a partnership between the publishing industry and tech companies rather than subservience. Emphasizing the importance of fair trading practices to ensure that both parties benefit from AI innovations, he welcomed the government’s recognition of AI’s potential but stressed the need to protect copyright. Publishers face significant challenges in ensuring that AI-generated content does not infringe on existing copyrights. There is a growing need for transparency and disclosure in AI use, particularly in contractual agreements between authors and publishers. The publishing industry advocates for responsible AI use, emphasizing the importance of licensing and fair compensation for creators. Large publishers are exploring AI adoption while ensuring compliance with existing laws and advocating for clearer regulations.

However, the coin has two sides: an increasing number of writers and publishers are reaching for AI – this type of cooperation lacks guidelines, regulations, and proper ethical and quality checkpoints.

The intersection of AI and copyright law presents complex challenges that require thoughtful and coordinated responses from governments, industries, and creators alike. As AI continues to transform the creative landscape, it is essential to develop legal frameworks that balance innovation with the protection of intellectual property rights. Unfortunately, though not surprisingly, the companies benefiting from the lack of regulations are the ones not particularly interested in implementing frameworks that would complicate and restrict existing business models.

Based on the panel, here are some key highlights that may be useful for understanding the current conversation and status of AI legalisation:

Who or what should we protect? The U.S. and U.K. approaches to AI and copyright

U.S.: The Copyright Office has reaffirmed that works created solely by AI are not eligible for copyright protection. This stance emphasizes the requirement for human authorship, leaving AI-generated content outside the traditional copyright framework. 40 cases are currently pending in U.S. courts regarding AI and copyright, most of which involve infringement.

UK: In contrast, the UK’s 1998 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act provides a more nuanced approach, attributing ownership of computer-generated works to the person who made the necessary arrangements for their creation. This UK law is not without controversy, as it raises questions about the originality and authorship of AI-generated content. The good news is that due to Dan Conwey, there are at least 10 UK politicians engaged in creating significant momentum within the political system.

However, it seems that AI develops a way faster than any policies and regulations.

Should prompt rights be protected?

In both countries, the prompts used to generate AI content might be copyrightable, but this is not a clear-cut solution for protecting AI-generated works. While AI-generated works themselves may not be copyrightable, the prompts used to create them could potentially be protected under copyright. This aspect highlights the complexity of applying traditional copyright principles to AI-driven creative processes. Both countries face the challenge of determining how to protect these prompts and whether they can serve as a basis for claiming ownership over AI-generated content.

What will The New York Times lawsuit against OpenAI change?

The current legal frameworks in both countries are evolving and lack clear precedents for AI-generated content. A good example is the NYT case:

The New York Times is involved in a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging that these companies used millions of Times articles without permission to train their AI models, such as ChatGPT. This unauthorized use is claimed to infringe on the Times’ copyrights and undermine its business model by providing access to its content without subscription or payment. The lawsuit highlights the tension between tech companies’ use of AI and the need to protect intellectual property rights. The outcome could set a precedent for how AI companies must interact with copyrighted material in the future.

Ed. Just two weeks after the discussion, the NYT won the case. Notably, the Harvard Law Review pointed out last year that in this case, the plaintiff found themselves in the same position as journalists who had previously sued a publication for the unauthorized use of their articles in online archives. Back then, the journalists also won.

As complicated as space exploration

The debate over AI-generated works highlights the tension between technological innovation and intellectual property rights.

“The tech sector often argues that licensing is too complicated, despite their capabilities in advanced technologies like driverless cars and space exploration. Initially, governments may have accepted this argument, but it has come to be seen as unrealistic,” Maria A. Pallante.

The role of AI in creative processes complicates traditional notions of authorship and control.

“The creative industries are working together in the UK and they are collaborating with their counterparts in the UK. This unity is important because it helps educate lawmakers about the economic stakes involved.

Regulation is broader than just copyright; it encompasses safety, military, authority, voice, and climate issues. We advocate for copyright and IP to be part of this regulatory framework to protect the public,” Dan Conway.

11 billion at stake

The UK’s publishing industry generates £11 billion and employs one in seven people. As a result of its economic importance, the industry is pressured to stay relevant and evolve with AI. In response, it is actively advocating for responsible AI use, emphasizing the importance of licensing and fair compensation for creators.

Large publishers are exploring AI adoption while ensuring compliance with existing laws and advocating for clearer regulations.

As the legal landscape continues to evolve, there is potential for new frameworks to develop. These discussions are likely to shape future regulations in both the U.S. and UK, influencing how AI is integrated into creative industries. It was notable that most of the professionals who attended the panel were British or European. A disproportionately small number of representatives from Arab countries and South Asian countries were present.

In summary: what should publishers do?

Based on the exchange of opinions, Chytomo prepared a list of recommendations for protecting the rights of writers and publishers. These recommendations can be useful regardless of country:

Include Specific AI-Related Clauses in Contracts/Book Covers: When signing contracts with publishers or collaborators, ensure that there are clauses requiring the disclosure of any AI usage in the creative process. This helps maintain transparency and protects your rights, even in a future courtroom.

Advocate for Clear Legislation: Support efforts to create clearer, more harmonized laws regarding AI-generated content. This can help ensure that your rights as a creator are consistently protected across different jurisdictions.

Engage with Industry Discussions: Participate in discussions within the publishing industry and beyond to emphasize the importance of licensing and fair compensation for creators when AI is used. Discussions are a valuable way to shape the industry position and create foundations for legal cases.

Monitor for Unauthorized Use: Be vigilant about how your work might be used by AI systems without permission. This includes monitoring for unauthorized copying or adaptation of your content. For example, Copyscape, Copyleaks, Unicheck, TinEye, Google Alerts, Visualping, Versionista, Wachete, OnWebChange, and the Copyright Infringement Portal.

Educate Yourself and Others: Stay informed about legal developments and technological advancements related to AI and copyright. Staying up to date on different legal landscapes can provide context for healthy practices and implementations. Share this knowledge with fellow authors and industry professionals to foster a community that advocates for creators’ rights.

Copy editing: Terra Friedman King