EFF to Courts: Don’t Rewrite Copyright Over AI Hype

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed amicus briefs in two key AI copyright cases, urging courts to resist rewriting copyright law based on AI hype. The briefs, filed in Concord Music Group, Inc. v. Anthropic PBC and In re Mosaic LLM Litigation, argue that rightsholders are asking courts to dramatically expand copyright protections in ways that would undermine fair use and competition.

Historical Precedents

EFF draws parallels to past copyright panics: in the 1980s, rightsholders compared videotape recorders to the “Boston strangler,” but the Supreme Court allowed time-shifting. Similarly, fears that player pianos and cameras would destroy music and painting proved unfounded—cameras actually sparked photojournalism and new creative markets.

The Core Argument: Market Dilution Theory Is Wrong

Plaintiffs argue that AI tools might encourage competing works, so training them can’t be fair use under a “market dilution” theory. EFF counters that copyright law punishes infringement, not competition. Accepting this theory would give rightsholders veto power over any expression that might compete, thus silencing future creators and undermining copyright's constitutional purpose.

Two Additional Points

• Large models are less likely to infringe: Research shows that with more training data, any single example matters less to outputs.
• AI tools aren’t displacing human creativity: Examples include Nettrice Gaskins, who uses AI for Afro-futurist art, and MIT professor Ana Miljački, who created a non-linear documentary with AI.

EFF emphasizes that copyright should promote creation, not lock in existing gatekeepers. Courts should heed the Supreme Court's warning and avoid rewriting copyright law based on speculative harm.