Sponsors (4)
The bill strengthens copyright owners' ability to learn whether their works were used to train generative AI through faster subpoenas and limits on fishing requests, at the cost of imposing compliance burdens, potential exposure of developers' trade secrets, and limited procedural safeguards that could chill innovation and raise privacy risks.
Small-business owners and nonprofits (copyright owners) can compel AI developers to produce records showing whether and how their works were used to train generative models, improving rights-holders' ability to detect unauthorized use.
Creates a faster, court-administered mechanism (clerk-issued subpoenas) to compel disclosure from AI developers about training materials, speeding enforcement and reducing procedural delay for claimants.
Limits subpoenas to works likely owned or controlled by the requester, reducing broad fishing expeditions into unrelated copyrighted material.
AI developers (including startups and small firms) may have to disclose proprietary training data or related records, risking exposure of trade secrets and competitive harm.
The statute appears to lack explicit procedural safeguards (redaction rules, protective orders), so requesters could obtain sensitive or private material without clear privacy protections.
Developers face potentially burdensome compliance costs and short timelines to respond to subpoenas, increasing operational expenses and legal overhead for affected firms.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Adds a Title 17 subpoena authority for AI model copies/records and establishes statutory definitions for AI, models, developers, training material, and substantial modification.
Official title: To create an administrative subpoena process to assist copyright owners in determining which of their copyrighted works have been used in the training of artificial intelligence models.
Introduced January 22, 2026 by Madeleine Dean · Last progress January 22, 2026
Adds a new provision to Title 17 of the U.S. Code creating a subpoena authority for copies or records relating to artificial intelligence models and supplies a set of definitions for terms like "artificial intelligence," "artificial intelligence model," "generative artificial intelligence model," "developer," "training material," and "substantially modify." The text supplied does not include the operative text of the subpoena provision itself, so the bill's enforcement mechanics, procedures, covered agencies, exemptions (e.g., for trade secrets), penalties, funding, or timelines are not present.