You’re fired! Another day, and another example of Trump commercialising the office of President for personal gain
The U.S. Copyright Office recently released a detailed report on the complex issue of using copyrighted materials to train artificial intelligence (AI) models, which has sparked heated debate in the tech and creative industries. However, the report’s measured recommendations were overshadowed by the Trump administration’s swift dismissal of the office’s director.
The rules governing intellectual property (IP) in the AI era will shape innovation, creativity, and economic growth for decades. Yet, crafting fair policies is increasingly difficult in a polarised climate where political agenda, Trump’s personal financial interests and insider influence can take precedence over balanced governance.
Using protected works to train AI systems has been a flashpoint since generative AI tools like ChatGPT and Grok gained prominence and attracted widespread use.
While some content creators have negotiated licensing deals with tech firms, others have pursued legal action, and many are awaiting clarity on legal boundaries.
The Copyright Office’s carefully worded report, spanning more than 100 pages, advocates for a balanced framework that supports both tech innovation and the rights of creators.
The report suggests that some AI applications may qualify as “transformative” under the fair use doctrine, but widespread, indiscriminate data scraping for commercial purposes likely does not. It emphasises that fair use depends on factors like the source of the data, the purpose of its use, and the impact on the market for the original works. To address these challenges, the report calls for government action to encourage a market for licensed AI training data.
Perhaps predictably, the government has taken action. The director of the office that produced the report has been fired. Within a day of the report’s release, the Trump administration terminated Shira Perlmutter, the Register of Copyrights, in a move that defied tradition, as the Copyright Office operates under Congressional oversight. This followed the earlier dismissal of the Librarian of Congress, suggesting a pattern of targeting officials who challenge administration priorities.
It’s hard to ignore the similarity of behaviour to dictators in totalitarian states and regimes.
Representative Joe Morelle (district of New York) argued that the timing – coming right after the report’s release – implies it was retaliation for Perlmutter’s refusal to endorse unchecked AI training on copyrighted works, a position favoured by some tech moguls close to Trump. “This is about clearing the way for insiders to exploit intellectual property for profit,” Morelle stated.
While Democrats condemned Perlmutter’s firing as an unlawful power grab, the U.S. needs its constituents to rally in the millions for change to occur. Talk is cheap.
Tech companies, including OpenAI, argue that access to vast datasets, including copyrighted material, is essential for the U.S. to maintain its AI edge over competitors like China, which has a history of lax copyright enforcement. In contrast, creative industries, represented by groups like the News/Media Alliance, demand consent and compensation for their works. The Alliance argued in a recent filing that “Forcing publishers to subsidise AI development without fair payment is as unreasonable as expecting cloud providers to offer free computing power”.
It’s hard to argue against the accusation that Perlmutter’s dismissal is yet another example of Trump and his allies prioritising personal and insider gains over public interest. The Trump family’s business ventures, such as a US$2 billion crypto deal with foreign entities and suspicious stock market activity tied to policy shifts, are evidence of exploiting political power for profit.
Like Imelda Marcos and her husband, former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos, who were charged with multiple offences related to corruption and embezzlement, we should be very concerned for the people of America, their rights and freedoms. All appear to be at risk of systematic undermining. It is virtually without question that the firing of an independent official like Perlmutter raises concerns that copyright policy may be shaped to benefit a select few rather than the broader public.
The question remains: will the rules serve the public good, or will they continue to be crafted to enrich Trump and those closest to him?
Roger Montgomery is the Founder and Chairman of Montgomery Investment Management. Roger has over three decades of experience in funds management and related activities, including equities analysis, equity and derivatives strategy, trading and stockbroking. Prior to establishing Montgomery, Roger held positions at Ord Minnett Jardine Fleming, BT (Australia) Limited and Merrill Lynch.
He is also author of best-selling investment guide-book for the stock market, Value.able – how to value the best stocks and buy them for less than they are worth.
Roger appears regularly on television and radio, and in the press, including ABC radio and TV, The Australian and Ausbiz. View upcoming media appearances.
This post was contributed by a representative of Montgomery Investment Management Pty Limited (AFSL No. 354564). The principal purpose of this post is to provide factual information and not provide financial product advice. Additionally, the information provided is not intended to provide any recommendation or opinion about any financial product. Any commentary and statements of opinion however may contain general advice only that is prepared without taking into account your personal objectives, financial circumstances or needs. Because of this, before acting on any of the information provided, you should always consider its appropriateness in light of your personal objectives, financial circumstances and needs and should consider seeking independent advice from a financial advisor if necessary before making any decisions. This post specifically excludes personal advice.
