Katherine Klosek, Director, Information Policy and Federal Relations, ARL
Contributions from the Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) by Katherine McColgan, Manager, Administration and Programs, CARL
|
This month, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of internet service provider Cox in Cox v. Sony, in a welcome decision that protects internet access for millions. ARL joined an amicus brief in favor of Cox in September 2025.
ARL urged the White House to preserve the ADA Title II web accessibility rule, which libraries rely on to require vendors and publishers to deliver content in accessible formats. The White House introduced its AI framework, which aligns with the Library Copyright Alliance (LCA) position on AI training and copyright.
ARL and our partners in the Re:Create Coalition welcomed the withdrawal of H.R. 6028 from markup; the bill raised concerns about decoupling the Copyright Office from the Library of Congress. ARL and the American Library Association (ALA) urged the Senate Commerce Committee not to repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, warning that any reform must account for the law’s protections for libraries.
ARL joined an amicus brief asking the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to uphold the existing standard for secondary copyright infringement.
Also this month, Acting Librarian of Congress Robert Newlen testified in support of the library’s FY 2027 appropriations request, including $5.4 million for a centralized AI enterprise platform.
In Canada, CARL participated in the first National Summit on Artificial Intelligence and Culture, hosted by Canadian Heritage, and followed the event with a letter to Cabinet members advocating for a thoughtful approach to AI legislation and the need for a text and data mining exception for educational purposes.
In comments to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Secretariat on the recent Toolkit on Access to Copyrighted Works in the Collections of Cultural Heritage Institutions: Libraries, Archives and Museums, CARL expressed concerns over the scope of the document and noted that the current draft fails to comprehensively address access in the digital environment.
And, in a meeting with a senior policy advisor from the Office of the Minister of Industry, CARL spoke about the importance of fair dealing for educational institutions and the ways that the postsecondary sector operationalizes copyright compliance.
Read on for more details!
The monthly Public Policy Briefing highlights developments in ARL’s public policy priorities, issues that are relevant to the research library community in the United States and Canada, and details on advocacy conducted by ARL and CARL. Please encourage your colleagues to sign up for the Public Policy Briefing.
If you have questions or suggestions, please email me at kklosek@arl.org.
|
Copyright and Fair Use/Fair Dealing
|
Federal Funding for Library Priorities
|
Online Speech and Censorship
|
ARL Urges Administration to Preserve ADA Title II Web Accessibility Rule
|
The Trump administration has signaled its intent to modify Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which requires state and local governments to make their websites and applications accessible, but no details about the potential changes have been released.
In response, ARL requested a meeting with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) at the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to explain how libraries depend on the ADA to require vendors and publishers to deliver content in accessible formats as a matter of federal law compliance. In this letter to the administration, ARL expresses agreement with NFB’s points that there is no emergency or urgent basis that warrants use of the IFR process to reform the Title II regulation.
|
CARL Participates in National Summit on AI and Culture
|
CARL participated in the first National Summit on Artificial Intelligence and Culture, hosted by Canadian Heritage in partnership with the Banff Centre for Arts and Creativity. The event took place in Banff, Alberta, March 15–17 and participants were invited to provide feedback on how Canada can build stronger partnerships in AI research and development, protect creativity in the age of AI, and empower the cultural sector through responsible adoption and talent development.
CARL followed up in a letter to Evan Solomon, minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation, and Marc Miller, minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, restating CARL’s support for a thoughtful approach to AI legislation and the need for a text and data mining exception for educational purposes. Read CARL’s comments following the National Summit on Artificial Intelligence and Culture.
|
White House AI Framework States Government’s Official Position on Copyright and AI
|
In its “National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence,” the White House stated its official position that training AI models on copyrighted material constitutes fair use:
Although the Administration believes that training of AI models on copyrighted material does not violate copyright laws, it acknowledges arguments to the contrary exist and therefore supports allowing the Courts to resolve this issue. Similarly, Congress should not take any actions that would impact the judiciary’s resolution of whether training on copyrighted material constitutes fair use.
This makes explicit what had been understood to be the administration’s position. In a July 2025 speech on the administration’s AI Action Plan, President Trump suggested that AI training on copyrighted works does not violate copyright law, though the Action Plan itself stopped short of saying so directly. It is unknown how the administration will act on this position, for example, whether it will file amicus briefs in AI cases.
|
Copyright and Fair Use/Fair Dealing
|
US Supreme Court Ruling in Favor of Cox Protects Internet Access
|
On March 25, the US Supreme Court ruled that internet service provider (ISP) C0x is not liable for secondary copyright infringement for the online activities of its users based on the facts of the case. The court unanimously articulated a narrower rule for contributory infringement based on intent, rather than knowledge, making it highly unlikely that a library would ever be found liable for contributory infringement.
The case began when Sony sued Cox for failing to terminate repeat users who Sony said were repeatedly downloading or sharing copyrighted files without permission on its network, resulting in a jury verdict of $1 billion. The vicarious liability and $1 billion verdict was overturned on appeal, though the court upheld Cox’s liability for willful contributory infringement.
Had the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, ISPs could have been faced with either terminating their customers’ internet access or paying billion-dollar statutory damages—putting internet access for millions at stake. As the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) explained in an amicus brief in support of Cox, joined by ARL, ALA, and Re:Create, the consequences of losing internet access are severe and disproportionate, particularly as internet access is essential for distance learning, telework, and telemedicine.
For more, please see: “US Supreme Court Ruling in Favor of Cox Protects Internet Access.”
|
Library Copyright Alliance Joins Amicus Brief Defending the Right to Link Without Concern for Copyright Liability
|
As part of the Library Copyright Alliance (LCA), ARL joined an amicus brief filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urging the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to uphold the district court’s interpretation of a legal standard known as the “server test.” Under the server test, copyright liability for displaying online content falls on whoever hosts that content on their server, and not to platforms or websites that simply link to it.
Libraries routinely include links and embedded images in their catalogs to help users find books, databases, and other resources in library collections. If the server test were overturned, libraries could face copyright liability merely for linking to third-party content they neither store nor control. The brief argues that links are fundamentally navigation tools that point to content located elsewhere, and that can change or disappear at any time. Further, linking and embedding do not violate Section 1202 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which only assigns liability for intentional actions directly connected to infringing activity.
The case arises from a copyright lawsuit brought by Emmerich Newspapers against Particle Media, a news aggregator that displayed snippets of articles Emmerich had registered with the US Copyright Office. Upholding the server test would mean Particle Media cannot be held liable for content it links to but does not host or control.
Other organizations joining the brief include ALA, ARL’s partner in LCA; Chamber of Progress; the Computer & Communications Industry Association; Public Knowledge; and the Organization for Transformative Works. ARL has joined amicus briefs in several other cases challenging the server test. The appellate courts have consistently upheld the test.
|
US House Committee Pulls H.R. 6028 from Markup to Address Concerns
|
At the start of a scheduled markup before the US Committee on House Administration, Chairman Bryan Steil (R-WI) withdrew the Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act (H.R. 6028) from consideration, stating that Congress would revisit the bill and remedy concerns with it.
This is a welcome development. Most of H.R. 6028’s provisions are relatively straightforward: the bill would shift responsibility for appointing and removing the librarian of Congress and director of the Government Publishing Office (GPO) to a bipartisan congressional commission. However, the bill’s proposal to sever the Copyright Office from the Library of Congress raises concerns about the long-standing system through which works registered with the US Copyright Office are deposited in the Library of Congress—a system that has contributed significantly to the development of the library’s national collection.
The bill will return for a vote in the coming weeks. ARL has cautioned Congress not to fast-track this bill in order to give these issues due consideration. Re:Create issued this letter explaining the coalition’s concerns with the bill.
|
ARL Issues Statement Opposing the Pro Codes Act
|
Following the reintroduction of the Protecting and Enhancing Public Access to Codes (Pro Codes) Act, ARL issued this statement reiterating our opposition to the bill.
Last year, ARL led a coalition of library and civil society groups in a letter explaining to Congress why granting private entities exclusive copyright ownership over codes and standards when they are incorporated by reference into law is problematic for researchers, journalists, consumers, and the general public.
For libraries in particular, the Pro Codes Act would reverse a foundational legal principle that once a standard or code is incorporated by reference into law, it enters the public domain. This principle, known as the government edicts doctrine, has long ensured that libraries can provide meaningful access to government documents for researchers, students, and the general public. Congress does not need to change the law in order for libraries, nonprofits, and startups to provide public access to the law.
|
CARL Advocates for Educational Fair Dealing
|
In a meeting with a senior policy advisor from the Office of the Minister of Industry, CARL spoke about the importance of fair dealing for educational institutions and the ways that the postsecondary sector operationalizes copyright compliance. Additionally, CARL reiterated the significant challenges that all users face in the modern digital licensing ecosystem and the consequences of subscriptions over ownership for libraries.
|
CARL Suggests Revisions to WIPO Access Toolkit
|
Federal Funding for Library Priorities
|
Acting Librarian of Congress Robert Newlen Proposes Centralized AI Enterprise Platform in FY 2027 Budget Request
|
During a hearing before the US House Appropriations Subcommittee on the Legislative Branch, Acting Librarian of Congress Robert Newlen testified in support of the library’s FY 2027 appropriations request of $931 million—a 3.8 percent increase over FY 2026, which has remained level since FY 2024. Of the total, $5.4 million would be dedicated to a centralized AI enterprise platform that would support the Congressional Research Service (CRS), as well as support bibliographic data and collections workflows for the Library Collections and Services Group. Newlen described the library’s current AI pilots, including decreasing the backlog of CRS Bill Summaries and improving metadata creation and discovery.
|
Online Speech and Censorship
|
ARL and ALA Urge Senate Commerce Committee Not to Repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
|
During a hearing this month, “Liability or Deniability? Platform Power as Section 230 Turns 30,” members of the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation engaged witnesses in questions about potential changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
One line of questioning centered on whether to carve out protection against liability for algorithmic amplification. Daphne Keller, director of Platform Regulation, Program in Law, Science, and Technology, Stanford Law School, explained that just as Congress cannot prohibit lawful content, it cannot direct platforms to change their algorithms. According to the US Supreme Court, burdens on distributing speech are subject to the same scrutiny as explicit bans on speech. While libraries were not mentioned in the hearing, in her written testimony, Keller listed libraries and universities as real-world defendants in Section 230 cases illustrating the diversity of online platforms protected by the law.
Following the hearing, ARL and ALA sent this letter to leadership and members of the Senate Commerce Committee reiterating our position that Congress should not repeal Section 230, and that Congress should consider consequences for libraries in any serious conversations about reforming Section 230. For more on Section 230, please see ARL’s updated webpage, “Section 230 and Libraries.”
At the conclusion of the hearing, Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) announced that she released the TRUMP AMERICA AI Act discussion draft. The draft includes a provision to sunset Section 230 within two years after the enactment of the act. The Re:Create Coalition, of which ARL is a member, issued this statement opposing the legislation.
|
About the Association of Research Libraries
|
The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) is a nonprofit membership organization of research libraries and archives in major public and private universities, federal government agencies, and large public institutions in Canada and the US. ARL champions research libraries and archives, develops visionary leaders, and shapes policy for the equitable advancement of knowledge.
|
|
|
Manage your preferences | Opt Out using TrueRemove™
Got this as a forward? Sign up to receive our future emails.
View this email online.
|
1025 Connecticut Avenue NW #1200 | Washington, DC 20036 US
|
|
|
This email was sent to .
To continue receiving our emails, add us to your address book.
| | |
|
|
