The administration's blueprint. Directs agencies to consider a state's AI regulatory climate in funding decisions and to encourage open-weight models, both traceable to specific RFI asks.
Vehicles carry asks; asks outlive them
Sorted by what filers wanted done to the rules
“High-risk decision-making shall not take place unless, at least one month before the high-risk decision-making takes place, the employer has taken into account the concerns and interests of workers or employees who are or may be affected by it.”
Draft bill by Robin Allen KC and Dee Masters for the TUC.
“Rather, it addresses these risks by specifically requiring human oversight of high-risk systems, subjecting systems to comprehensive pre-deployment and biennial impact assessments, and protecting the critical role of trained workers in government decision-making.”
Op-ed co-authored by NYS AFL-CIO President Mario Cilento and Sen. Kristen Gonzalez.
“In its last days in office, the Biden Administration seeks to undermine America’s leadership with a 200+ page regulatory morass, drafted in secret and without proper legislative review. This sweeping overreach would impose bureaucratic control over how America’s leading semiconductors, computers, systems and even software are designed and marketed globally.”
“Make it simpler. Stop relegating American friends and allies into a second tier that undermines their confidence in ongoing access to American products. Eliminate the quantitative caps that would interfere with a well-functioning economic market. And keep what matters most, such as the qualitative security standards and AI use restrictions that protect national security.”
“We advocate for tightening semiconductor export restrictions so as to ensure America and its allies can capitalize on the opportunities of powerful AI systems, and to prevent our adversaries from accessing the AI infrastructure that enables powerful AI. This includes controlling H20 chips, requiring government-to-government agreements for countries hosting large chip deployments, and reducing no-license-required thresholds.”
“We encourage the Trump Administration, and BIS in particular, to withdraw the Interim Final Rule (IFR) on a Framework for AI Diffusion and open a new, deliberative rulemaking process with stakeholders to protect national security without undermining U.S. companies’ of all sizes ability to compete globally.”
“Americans who work for a living deserve more. We need sensible guardrails to ensure jobs aren't decimated, guarantees of meaningful human oversight of the technology, and the exploration of a national four-day work week at full-time pay.”
Statement of Lorena Gonzalez condemning the AI Action Plan; coded support relative to worker-guardrail asks.
“Embedding backdoors and kill switches into chips would be a gift to hackers and hostile actors. It would undermine global digital infrastructure and fracture trust in U.S. technology.”
“a government chip tracking mandate would create the impression of deepening U.S. government control over the American AI stack, fueling questions about the security, reliability, and privacy of U.S. technology and pushing the very countries that should be core customers of U.S. providers toward alternatives”
“These cases demonstrate that the fair use defense enables courts to consider all the fair use factors and apply them in the context of specific facts. MPA submits that this type of inquiry is the appropriate way to deal with the many types of potential infringements that may arise under the broad umbrella of “training” a generative AI system.”
Position is case-by-case fair-use analysis, opposing categorical treatment of training as fair use; also opposes new AI-specific copyright legislation.
“We believe that, in general, training generative AI constitutes fair use under current U.S. law. Using creative works to train generative AI fits with the long line of cases that has found that non-consumptive, technological uses of creative works in ways that are unrelated to the expressive content of those works are transformative fair uses”
“Open source software provides much of the foundation of the internet, is extensively used by government agencies, and is widely considered to be more secure from malicious actors than proprietary software. Consequently, there is no inherent reason to prohibit the creation, dissemination, and use of Open Models.”
“Retaining the UK’s gold standard copyright protections - and ensuring the law is enforceable and respected in the face of the challenges posed by GAI - will create incentives for GAI developers to enter into licence agreements with rights holders, ensuring a steady flow of quality, human-authored works for GAI training.”
“We are clear in our view that the training of AI models is a non-expressive use of open web content, which boosts economic growth, fosters scientific advancement, and enables the creation of valuable new works.”
“techUK believes that Option 2 – the broad TDM exception – would provide the strongest competitive advantage for the UK's AI sector and create significant opportunities for economic growth and will be the preferred option of many.”
“The federal government can both secure Americans’ freedom to learn from AI, and avoid forfeiting our AI lead to the PRC by preserving American AI models’ ability to learn from copyrighted material.”
“And the federal government should embrace policy frameworks that preserve access to data for fair learning, advance a risk-based approach to AI applications based on existing regulations, and preempt a chaotic patchwork of state-level rules on frontier AI development.”
“And the federal government should embrace policy frameworks that preserve access to data for fair learning, advance a risk-based approach to AI applications based on existing regulations, and preempt a chaotic patchwork of state-level rules on frontier AI development.”
Same sentence carries both the fair-learning and preemption asks; recorded once per ask.
“The AI Action Plan should encourage the continued development of free market licensing to support a symbiotic relationship between content creators, publishers, and AI developers.”
“In addition, we urge the administration to clarify that existing copyright law protects the ability of developers to train models. Getting this right is critical to ensuring American competitiveness in AI.”
“Specifically, the nation’s AI policy and AI Action Plan should respect intellectual property, support the development of voluntary licensing in free markets, and promote appropriate transparency and fair competition in the AI and technology sector.”
The filed RFI comments; doc-nma-actionplan-2025 is the accompanying press release.
“We believe a broad text and data mining exception, as described in Option 2, is the most effective way to achieve the Government’s objectives to unlock and leverage the benefits of AI in the UK.”
Submitted via IPO survey 25 Feb 2025; summary published 2 Apr 2025 at the Commons SITC's request.
“This bill does not propose any regulatory scheme to replace or supplement the laws enacted or currently under consideration by the states, leaving Americans entirely unprotected from the potential harms of AI.”
Signed by 40 attorneys general, bipartisan.
“The report presents thoughtful and balanced analysis of fair use in the context of AI training, emphasizing that AI training is not categorically fair use and that whether a use qualifies as a fair use is a matter of context and degree.”
“In the report, the Copyright Office takes the sensible and correct approach that AI training is not categorically fair use and that whether a use qualifies as a fair use is a matter of context and degree.”
“More than 1,000 AI-related bills have already been introduced at the state and local level this year. Without a federal moratorium there will be a growing patchwork of state and local laws that will significantly limit AI development and deployment.”
Coalition letter of 250+ business associations to Senate leaders Thune and Schumer.
“We, the undersigned organizations, call on you to strike the AI moratorium from the budget reconciliation text to protect our families. It is irresponsible and short sighted to strip children, creators, and Americans from all backgrounds of their most basic protections and tie the hands of state legislators.”
Co-led 140+ organization letter (with Common Sense Media, Young People's Alliance, ARI and others).
“However, its purpose is clear: create a standing mechanism for the federal government to attack a wide range of state laws even before those laws are fully implemented and, ideally, chill them from being adopted in the first place.”
“The Secretary of State must now definitively rule out any new copyright exception, bringing an end to the uncertainty created by this prolonged process over the past year. This will send a clear message to AI developers that they must enter into licensing agreements with the UK’s media and creative copyright owners”
“This is a disastrous proposal that Big Tech is celebrating. This bill strips states of their authority to respond to real harms consumers are experiencing.”