MPA Says Copyright Law Must Be Defended In AI Age

Yahoo

01-04-2025

In a ten-page comment directed to the White House Office of Science and Technology earlier this month, the Motion Picture Association said AI 'can, and must, coexist with a copyright system that incentivizes the creation of original expression and protects the rights of copyright owners.'
The trade group repping members Amazon Studios, Netflix, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures, Universal, Walt Disney Studios and Warner Bros. Entertainment sent the missive during a now closed comment period sought by the Trump administration as it formulates its AI policy. Giants like OpenAI and Google have asked for fewer restrictions on how they use content to feed their large language models, posting a threat to the current copyright regime. They are calling it a national security matter because if anything slows them down, China will pull ahead in the AI race.
More from Deadline
Warner Bros' Jeff Goldstein Sounds Alarm On Economics Of Making Movies: "We Have To Figure Out How We Can Right The Ship" - CinemaCon
As CinemaCon Fires Up, Here Are The Biggest Mistakes Studios & Exhibitors Are Making Right Now
Kendrick Lamar, Trey Parker & Matt Stone Movie From Paramount Heads To Spring 2026 - CinemaCon
The filing, quietly posted to the MPA's website, stakes out a position in broad strokes in line with the creative community but moderate enough to pass muster with all of its members. It follows public policy statements like the use of AI-generated digital replicas, and AI-generated content in political ads.
The latest statement comes as AI really heats up. Artificial Intelligence has 'great potential to enhance human creativity, promote human flourishing and further our nation's economic competitiveness,' the MPA said. But 'to do this, these developments can, and must, coexist with a copyright system that incentivizes the creation of original expression and protects the rights of copyright owners.'
MPA President and CEO Charlie Rivkin echoed the sentiments in an interview with Deadline ahead of CinemaCon, the gathering of exhibitors and studios that started today in Las Vegas. He'll be addressing remarks to the group tomorrow but discussing other things.
'We want the U.S. to remain the global leader in filmmaking, and we want America to be the global leader in AI. And those ambitions are not mutually exclusive,' he said. 'Copyright is at the core of our industry, it's the most important thing we have.'
The letter comes as Hollywood guilds have slammed the MPA and its members for not being more vocal or taking to the courts — yet, at least — even as dozens of content creators from Sarah Silverman to the New York Times have sued AI giants for sucking up copyrighted material to train their models. In December, the WGA said Hollywood studios have 'harmed' its members and violated the Minimum Basic Agreement by not acting as their copyrighted works were used to train generative AI models.
Earlier this month, hundreds of Hollywood A-listers signed an open letter to the White House warning of massive, illegal value destruction and an existential threat to the entertainment industry if AI firms are allowed to skirt copyright law.
'It is clear that Google (valued at $2Tn) and OpenAI (valued at over $157Bn) are arguing for a special government exemption so they can freely exploit America's creative and knowledge industries, despite their substantial revenues and available funds. There is no reason to weaken or eliminate the copyright protections that have helped America flourish. Not when AI companies can use our copyrighted material by simply doing what the law requires: negotiating appropriate licenses with copyright holders — just as every other industry does. Access to America's creative catalog of films, writing, video content, and music is not a matter of national security. They do not require a government-mandated exemption from existing U.S. copyright law,' the letter said.
The MPA's comments are more restrained. 'The truth is that the protection of IP and innovation are mutually reinforcing values. In AI specifically, for example, copyright law incentivizes the creation of a variety of high-quality creative content, which AI developers in turn rely on to train their generative AI models. The quality of the content used to train AI affects the quality of the AI system—garbage in, garbage out; quality in, quality out.'
Both letters reinforced the economic proposition with the MPA noting that copyright industries contribute more than $2 trillion to the U.S. GDP, accounting for nearly 8% of the U.S. economy and more than half of the U.S. digital economy. Globally, foreign sales of U.S. copyright products outperform other major industries including chemicals manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, agricultural products and aerospace products. With export sales of $23 billion in 2023, audiovisual exports consistently generate a positive balance of trade with nearly every other country. In 2023, that trade surplus was $15.3 billion, or 6% of the total U.S. private-sector trade surplus in services, it said.
Strong copyright protection, the MPA noted, also aligns with Vice President Vance's declaration at the February 2025 Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris that 'We will always center American workers in our AI policy'— again, a sentiment with which MPA wholeheartedly agrees.'
'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 MPA, in one addendum, said it does oppose 'any requirement to label or disclose when AI tools are used in low-risk activities, such as the creation of works for expressive and entertainment purposes. Such a requirement is unnecessary; there is no reason, for example, to require a 'MADE WITH AI' label on a scene in a movie where visual-effects tools that incorporate AI are used to depict a superhero zooming between skyscrapers to save a fictionalized version of New York, or to place historic figures in a fictional setting. In fact, such hypothetical labeling requirements would hinder creative freedom and could conflict with the First Amendment's prohibition against compelled speech.'
Best of Deadline
Everything We Know About 'Black Mirror' Season 7 So Far
How Jon Gries' Return To 'The White Lotus' Could Shape Season 3
'Severance' Cast Through Seasons 1 & 2: Innies, Outies, Severed And Unsevered