Photo Credit: Igor Omilaev
Senators Peter Welch (D-VT), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Adam Schiff (D-CA), and Josh Hawley (R-MO) just recently reintroduced the bill, full title the Transparency and Responsibility for Artificial Intelligence Networks Act.
As we reported last year, the concise TRAIN Act would establish an administrative subpoena process enabling rightsholders to compel training-data disclosures from AI developers. Of course, the protected media ingested by generative models remains a major focus including in several ongoing infringement actions.
And while this focus certainly isnt new, quite a lot has changed in the quick-evolving AI world since the TRAIN Acts November 2024 introduction. Two examples: the rollout of Americas AI Action Plan (besides adjacent White House opposition to AI micro-licensing) and the perhaps more-vocal-than-ever criticism coming from Congress.
Earlier in July, for instance, the aforementioned Senator Hawley called out the involved businesses for allegedly perpetrating the largest intellectual property theft in American history.
The firmly worded comments set the stage for the introduction of the bipartisan AI Accountability and Personal Data Protection Act. In a nutshell, the Hawley-sponsored bill, as its title suggests, would allow individuals and companies to sue over their datas unauthorized use in AI training.
Evidently, the legislative pushback isnt through. Still backed by the RIAA, the majors themselves, A2IM, the Recording Academy, leading PROs, and many others in the industry, the TRAIN Act has gained a couple supporters since November.
These proponents include the National Association of Voice Actors as well as Recording Artists and Music Professionals with Disabilities, to name some. (A curious aside regarding the majors support: All three companies were touted as TRAIN Act advocates in November 2024, but the July 2025 release doesnt appear to mention Sony Music at all.)
Additionally, the measure, though substantially the same across both versions, has grown from six to eight pages. Without diving too far into the modifications, its worth noting that the newer TRAIN Act bolsters the definition of developer to encompass any person or State or local government agency&[that] designs, codes, produces, owns, or substantially modifies a generative artificial intelligence model.
Likewise subject to the proposed law are any future variations of existing AI models, even if created by a third party, the text spells out. Furthermore, training material now has an all-encompassing definition: any combination of text, images, audio, or other categories of expressive materials, as well as annotations describing the material.
The actual subpoena process those who believe their copyrighted works have been trained upon can request a subpoena from the clerk of any United States district court looks to be the same.
On the other hand, the bills latest version specifically emphasizes that rightsholders can only pursue subpoenas pertaining to their own IP; theyd also have a duty of confidentiality to keep the provided materials private.
Similarly significant, the courts would be able to impose sanctions on rightsholders who seek subpoenas in bad faith.
Time will tell whether the TRAIN Acts new components can fuel legislative momentum. Although there are admittedly key differences between the bill and the No Fakes Act, the latter does include a subpoena process albeit for deepfake content on online platforms and has gained the support of multiple tech companies in any event.
Closing with one of the many statements put out in support of the TRAIN Act, Copyright Alliance CEO Keith Kupferschmid stressed the perceived importance of reasonable transparency requirements.
The Copyright Alliance thanks Senator Welch, along with cosponsors Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Josh Hawley (R-MO), and Adam Schiff (D-CA), said Kupferschmid, for their commitment to transparency requirements that are essential to an AI ecosystem that is developed and used in a responsible, respectful, and ethical manner.
Imposing reasonable transparency requirements on AI developers is one of the most important steps that lawmakers can take to protect the public as well as the creative community.
We look forward to working with Senator Welch, the bills cosponsors, and other policymakers and stakeholders to ensure that transparency legislation that protects copyright owners from infringement and misuse of their work becomes law, he concluded.
