Trump Rejects Idea of Paying Copyright Holders for AI Training

President Trump waded into the complex issue of paying copyright holders whose works are used for AI training, saying it is impractical and would put the U.S. at a disadvantage to China.

Speaking Wednesday at an AI summit in Washington, D.C., Trump called for a “common sense” approach that will allow unfettered development of AI.

“You can’t be expected to have a successful AI program when every single article, book or anything else that you’ve read or studied, you’re supposed to pay for,” Trump said. “You just can’t do it, because it’s not doable.”

AI companies have also argued in court that training on copyrighted data is protected fair use. A couple of federal judges have agreed, siding with Meta and Anthropic in a pair of rulings in June that threw out artists’ infringement claims.

In his speech at the Andrew Mellon Auditorium, Trump gave a succinct rendition of the AI industry’s perspective on the issue.

“When a person reads a book or an article, you’ve gained great knowledge. That does not mean that you’re violating copyright laws or have to make deals with every content provider,” he said. “You just can’t do it. China’s not doing it… You have to play by the same set of rules… It just doesn’t work that way. Of course, you can’t copy or plagiarize an article, but if you read an article and learn from it, we have to allow AI to use that pool of knowledge without going through the complexity of contract negotiations, of which there would be thousands for every time we use AI.”

The Human Artistry Campaign — a coalition that includes Hollywood unions such as SAG-AFTRA, the Directors Guild of America, the Writers Guild of America and IATSE — has pushed the opposite side of the argument, maintaining that AI training should be done only with consent from rightsholders.

Responding to Trump’s remarks, the coalition stated that AI companies need high-quality copyrighted works in order to function.

“This can only be achieved through partnerships between creative industries and technology companies,” the group stated. “Taking creators’ works without consent or payment degrades the incentive to create. That will harm both American culture and American leadership in AI.”

Some advocates for creatives envision a payment scheme similar to ASCAP or BMI, where AI companies could license copyright works and royalties would be distributed to rightsholders, who would have the option to opt out of training.

“Licensing has created the most robust social media and digital distribution services in the world, and it can do the same for AI,” the Human Artistry Campaign said. “A zero-sum game will result in America losing the race for both creative and AI dominance. We are confident that the courts, applying Constitutional principles of copyright, will get this issue right and set the stage for continued American leadership in both AI and creativity for decades to come.”

In March, more than 400 Hollywood creative leaders signed an open letter to the Trump White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, urging the administration to not roll back copyright protections at the behest of AI companies. The group included Ben Stiller, Mark Ruffalo, Cynthia Erivo, Cate Blanchett, Cord Jefferson, Paul McCartney, Ron Howard and Taika Waititi. “We firmly believe that America’s global AI leadership must not come at the expense of our essential creative industries,” the letter said. “AI companies are asking to undermine this economic and cultural strength by weakening copyright protections for the films, television series, artworks, writing, music and voices used to train AI models at the core of multibillion-dollar corporate valuations.”

The Supreme Court may ultimately have to settle the legal question of whether AI training is “fair use,” or if rightsholders deserve compensation for it. But the political branches could also weigh in.

Sens. Josh Hawley and Richard Blumenthal introduced legislation on Monday to prohibit AI training on copyrighted works without permission. “AI companies are robbing the American people blind while leaving artists, writers, and other creators with zero recourse,” Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, said in a statement.

Other bills have also sought disclosure of the copyrighted works used in AI training.

The Motion Picture Association, which represents the major studios and streaming companies, has argued for a case-by-case approach to AI and fair use.

“As of now, there is no cause to believe the courts and existing law are not up to the task of applying existing copyright law to new technology — as courts have been doing for over a century — and thus MPA sees no reason for changes to U.S. law to resolve these fair use issues,” the lobbying group said in March.

The White House issued an AI Action Plan on Wednesday that called for further innovation, but did not address the copyright issue.

Trump also signed an executive order to prevent “woke AI in the federal government,” by directing agency heads to procure “only large language models (LLMs) that adhere to ‘Unbiased AI Principles’ defined in the order as “truth-seeking and ideological neutrality.” “President Trump is protecting Americans from biased AI outputs driven by ideologies like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) at the cost of accuracy,” the White House said in a summary of the order.

Pictured above: Trump speaking during the “Winning the AI Race” summit hosted by All‑In Podcast and Hill & Valley Forum at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium on July 23 in Washington, D.C.