Shira Perlmutter is no longer running the U.S. Copyright Office. Her exit wasn’t announced with formality or explained in any government statement, but it quickly drew political heat — and deeper questions about how copyright law collides with artificial intelligence.
Her dismissal came from Donald Trump, according to multiple reports, though no official comment followed from his campaign or team. Still, her removal came just hours after her office circulated a draft report that spelled trouble for tech companies mining creative works to train AI systems.
The timing wasn’t subtle. The report didn’t offer final rulings, but its message was clear: training AI models on copyrighted books, articles, and art — especially for commercial gain — probably won’t qualify as fair use. Courts will have to make those decisions eventually, but the Copyright Office isn’t leaning in favor of the AI firms.
The report acknowledged that not every use would break the rules. Research and analysis might be fine. But taking huge volumes of creative material, using it to produce market-ready content, and doing it without permission? That crosses a line, the document implied.
Perlmutter had been appointed in 2020, during Trump’s earlier term. This week, he also removed Carla Hayden, the Librarian of Congress, who originally gave her the role. These two changes — close together — didn’t go unnoticed.
On Capitol Hill, reaction came fast. Some lawmakers pointed directly at Elon Musk, who has a personal and financial interest in generative AI. Musk runs xAI, an AI startup that’s now being folded into the social platform formerly known as Twitter. He also co-founded OpenAI, which remains at the center of several lawsuits accusing it of using copyrighted data improperly.
A statement from Representative Joe Morelle, a Democrat on a House oversight panel, suggested that Perlmutter’s refusal to back Musk's position on copyright may have triggered her removal. He didn’t offer documentation, but he pointed at the report’s publication as a likely tipping point.
Trump, for his part, shared a post on his social network referencing Perlmutter’s firing. The message didn’t clarify his reasoning, but it hinted at approval. Ironically, the post came from an attorney critical of the move, arguing that AI firms were aiming to exploit creators for profit.
Meanwhile, the Copyright Office stopped short of demanding new laws or crackdowns. It proposed allowing licensing systems to develop, so that creators might negotiate directly with AI firms. If that fails, the agency floated broader models — like collective licenses — to balance power in the marketplace.
As of now, companies building AI models still face legal uncertainty. They're betting that courts will accept their use of protected content as transformative or educational. But growing pressure from artists, authors, and lawmakers is making that gamble riskier by the day.
Perlmutter’s departure isn’t just a staffing change. It signals that the coming fights over AI and copyright won’t just play out in courtrooms — they may start with personnel decisions in federal agencies.
Image: DIW-AI-gen
Read next:
• OpenAI Becomes the Default Setting for Corporate AI Spend
• Chatbots Hallucinate More With Confident or Short Prompts, Accuracy Drops Up to 20% in Critical Tasks
• How To Boost Your Instagram Reach, Engagement, And Followers The Right Way
Her dismissal came from Donald Trump, according to multiple reports, though no official comment followed from his campaign or team. Still, her removal came just hours after her office circulated a draft report that spelled trouble for tech companies mining creative works to train AI systems.
The timing wasn’t subtle. The report didn’t offer final rulings, but its message was clear: training AI models on copyrighted books, articles, and art — especially for commercial gain — probably won’t qualify as fair use. Courts will have to make those decisions eventually, but the Copyright Office isn’t leaning in favor of the AI firms.
The report acknowledged that not every use would break the rules. Research and analysis might be fine. But taking huge volumes of creative material, using it to produce market-ready content, and doing it without permission? That crosses a line, the document implied.
Perlmutter had been appointed in 2020, during Trump’s earlier term. This week, he also removed Carla Hayden, the Librarian of Congress, who originally gave her the role. These two changes — close together — didn’t go unnoticed.
On Capitol Hill, reaction came fast. Some lawmakers pointed directly at Elon Musk, who has a personal and financial interest in generative AI. Musk runs xAI, an AI startup that’s now being folded into the social platform formerly known as Twitter. He also co-founded OpenAI, which remains at the center of several lawsuits accusing it of using copyrighted data improperly.
A statement from Representative Joe Morelle, a Democrat on a House oversight panel, suggested that Perlmutter’s refusal to back Musk's position on copyright may have triggered her removal. He didn’t offer documentation, but he pointed at the report’s publication as a likely tipping point.
Trump, for his part, shared a post on his social network referencing Perlmutter’s firing. The message didn’t clarify his reasoning, but it hinted at approval. Ironically, the post came from an attorney critical of the move, arguing that AI firms were aiming to exploit creators for profit.
Meanwhile, the Copyright Office stopped short of demanding new laws or crackdowns. It proposed allowing licensing systems to develop, so that creators might negotiate directly with AI firms. If that fails, the agency floated broader models — like collective licenses — to balance power in the marketplace.
As of now, companies building AI models still face legal uncertainty. They're betting that courts will accept their use of protected content as transformative or educational. But growing pressure from artists, authors, and lawmakers is making that gamble riskier by the day.
Perlmutter’s departure isn’t just a staffing change. It signals that the coming fights over AI and copyright won’t just play out in courtrooms — they may start with personnel decisions in federal agencies.
Read next:
• OpenAI Becomes the Default Setting for Corporate AI Spend
• Chatbots Hallucinate More With Confident or Short Prompts, Accuracy Drops Up to 20% in Critical Tasks
• How To Boost Your Instagram Reach, Engagement, And Followers The Right Way
