The Copyright Office celebrated the anniversary with an event focused on its role in developing, administering, and updating the Copyright Act of 1976. The event, The Copyright Act Turns 50: An Inside View from the Copyright Office, took place on September 23, 2026—both virtually and in person—in the James Madison Memorial Building of the Library of Congress, on Capitol Hill. The recording of the event is now available for everyone to view.

The event featured remarks by Register of Copyrights and Director, U.S. Copyright Office, Shira Perlmutter; video remarks by four members of Congress: Representatives Darrell Issa and Hank Johnson and Senators Adam Schiff and Marsha Blackburn; as well as three panels of distinguished former Office and congressional staff who contributed to developing, administering, and updating the Copyright Act.

Register Perlmutter opened the event by describing a Copyright Act that has held up well over the last fifty years. She outlined the purposes of the Act by its drafters, especially noting their goal to “future-proof” it. She noted that the Act’s “standard of original authorship, and the flexible doctrine of fair use, continue to provide appropriate guidance to the Office, the courts, and the copyright community.” In her remarks, Register Perlmutter also explained the purpose of gathering Office and Capitol Hill alumni to celebrate the 1976 Act this year:

Today, amidst all of the other anniversary events being planned and having already taken place, we are taking the opportunity to recognize the critical role played by the Copyright Office over the life of the 1976 Act—not only in the preparatory studies and the drafting, not only in proselytizing for its passage, but also in the ongoing work that came after. That is: administering and teaching about the extensive new provisions in the statute and assisting Congress in shaping all of the major updates that have brought us to the twenty-first-century legal system we have today.

At the celebration, the Office recognized three former Registers of Copyrights: Ralph Oman, Maria Pallante, and Karyn Temple. Speakers gave special recognition to late former Registers of Copyrights Barbara Ringer and Marybeth Peters, without whom the Act would not exist or have been as successful.

To kick off the first panel, moderated by Associate Register of Copyrights and Director of Public Information and Education Miriam Lord and titled “Constructing the Act,” Eric Schwartz read remarks provided to the panel by Jon Baumgarten, who was General Counsel of the U.S. Copyright Office in 1976. Bruce Lehman and Schwartz shared insights from the legislative process and placed the Copyright Act within its historical context, situating it against developments happening inside and outside the United States. All three panelists discussed the Office’s active role in the process of supporting Congress in crafting the Act, as well as in the regulatory and operational implementation work that followed.

Acting Associate Register of Copyrights and Director of Registration Policy and Practice Erik Bertin moderated the second panel, “Administering the Act,” featuring Catherine Zaller Rowland and Mary Rasenberger. Bertin, Rasenberger, and Rowland each shared from their own experiences administering the copyright system as current or former Office staff. Bertin highlighted the many process changes the Office successfully navigated in implementing the new law, including scaling fourteen different application forms down to four and codifying new protections, like those for works made for hire, unpublished works, or anonymous/pseudonymous authorship. Rasenberger lauded the transparency of the Office, then and now, and walked through the drafting of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition as an essential resource for practitioners (and which was the first version developed as an online resource). Finally, Rowland emphasized how the changes to the law necessitated a new approach to copyright education. She noted that in the aftermath of the law’s implementation, the Office fielded an exponential increase in questions from the public as everyone, from beginners to experts, sought to understand the new law.

General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights Emily Chapuis moderated the third and final panel of the day, “Updating the Act,” with Mitch Glazier, Regan Smith, and David Carson. This panel addressed the Office’s involvement in updates to copyright law since the passage of the 1976 Act. Glazier talked about working on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) with the Office, and Smith shared insights from her time working on the section 1201 triennial rulemaking process and the implementation of the Music Modernization Act (MMA). Carson brought the audience into his experience studying the issue of copyright small claims and then helping to set up the Copyright Claims Board after the passage of the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act of 2020. All three panelists also reflected on key copyright studies they participated in while working at the Office or on Capitol Hill.

Following the three panels, in-person attendees had the opportunity to view a display table of items related to the Copyright Act’s history and implementation. These included a copy of the law, certified by the National Archives and Records Administration; a public announcement of the adoption of a new seal to authenticate documents issued by the Office in December 1977; a scrapbook of press clippings from 1975 to 1982 compiled by a staff member; and a selection of some of the first published and unpublished works registered under the new Act in 1978.

To learn more about the history of copyright in the United States, as well as more about the Office’s services, resources, and events, visit copyright.gov.

Fashion is an ever-evolving expression of creativity which ties together innovation, culture, and commerce. The U.S. Copyright Office is often asked, “Are my fashion designs protected under the copyright law?” With a constitutional purpose to promote creativity and free expression, copyright is a fundamental aspect of fashion. For example, copyright protection can extend to the visual works of art common to the fashion industry like sketches and fabric patterns, as well as certain garment embellishments—as long as they are original and sufficiently creative. 

Functional pieces of clothing, produced from original sketches, such as blazers, trousers, and shoes, are generally not copyrightable because copyright law excludes what are called “useful articles.” But fashion sketches of seasonal designs, such as the ones seen in the below illustration, “New York fashions. Fall & winter / Herald of Fashion Lith, N.Y.,” are protectable under the law. The Library of Congress is home to countless fashion-related works, some of which were acquired by the Library after submission to the Copyright Office for registration. For more information about fashion inspiration throughout the centuries, visit the Library’s Popular and Applied Graphic Art Collection. 

Beyond clothing, jewelry may be protectable under copyright law as sculptural works. Jewelry designs may be created in a variety of ways, including by carving, cutting, molding, casting, or shaping the work; arranging the elements into an original combination; or decorating the work with pictorial matter, such as a drawing or etching. As with other fashion designs, jewelry artists may submit copyright registrations for their designs to the Copyright Office. Registration establishes a public record of copyright ownership and offers several other practical and legal benefits. 

The fashion landscape can be complex for designers who are often working to get in front of rapidly changing trends. They must consider how to be responsible copyright owners and users. Copyright law aims to foster creativity and innovation while protecting the intellectual property of all creators.  

The Copyright Office offers many resources to help creators understand how copyright works for them. Discover the basics about copyrightability in Copyright Basics (Circular 1) (PDF, 109 KB). Learn more about navigating the copyright system and the benefits of registration with our Copyright Registration Toolkit. And get more information about the copyrightability of jewelry and the design aspects of useful articles in chapter 900, sections 908 and 924, of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition (PDF, 1,069 KB). 

In 1908, lyricist Jack Norworth and composer Albert Von Tilzer wrote what would become one of the most recognized and most sung musical works in the United States: “Take Me Out to the Ball Game.” In a relatively short period, it was performed for the first time, registered with the Copyright Office, and published in a series of sheet music depicting vaudeville stars on the covers. The song was an instant hit, though it wouldn’t become the baseball theme we know today until much later. With Opening Day and the start of the 2026 Major League Baseball (MLB) season, we’re looking at the history of the song and copyright’s connection to America’s favorite pastime.

Many people might not realize “Take Me Out to the Ball Game,” as we know it, is the chorus of a longer tune. In the full version, Norworth’s original lyrics tell the story of Katie Casey, a girl who wants her boyfriend to take her to fully experience a baseball game rather than to a show. Ironically, he wrote the song without having ever attended a professional baseball game. On May 2, 1908, Von Tilzer’s publishing company, York Music Co., registered the musical composition with the Copyright Office. Soon, more than thirty vaudeville stars performed the song, promoting it at theaters and nickelodeons, and were each featured on the cover of a different sheet music edition.

Years later, in 1927, Norworth rewrote the lyrics, renaming Katie Casey as Nelly Kelly and updating her image in the wake of women’s suffrage. The chorus, however, remained the same. He registered the updated lyrics and music with the Copyright Office on May 27, 1927.

The song eventually faded from the spotlight until it appeared in the 1949 film Take Me Out to the Ball Game, starring Frank Sinatra, Esther Williams, and Gene Kelly. The movie led to renewed popularity, and the song began making its way into ballparks around the country, with organists playing an instrumental version during the games. Then, in 1977, Chicago White Sox (and later Chicago Cubs) announcer Harry Caray sang the chorus of the song for the first time during the seventh-inning stretch, and a tradition was born. Today, the song is sung in major league ballparks around the country.

Ensuring the song’s legacy would extend beyond the ballpark, in 1975, Norworth’s estate instructed the performing rights organization ASCAP (The American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers) to use the future royalties from licensing “Take Me Out to the Ball Game” and Norworth’s other works for the creation of a program to support young musicians, leading to the establishment of the ASCAP Foundation.

The song’s original and revised lyrics are now in the public domain, and with the song no longer under copyright protection in the United States, anyone can use the musical work, including by singing it publicly, recording their own version, or creating a new work from it.

“Take Me Out to the Ball Game” is not the first, or only, musical work associated with America’s favorite pastime. In fact, music and baseball have always gone hand in hand, from as far back as 1858 with the organization of the first baseball league and the first composition of a musical work about baseball.

Baseball-themed music thrived, and sheet music for these songs became increasingly available. Early examples were notable for their colorful and elaborate illustrations on the cover, often depicting the game itself. One particularly rare collector’s piece was the sheet music for the song “Base Ball Polka,” written by composer Jas. M. Goodman, which featured a full-color lithographic cover of a game in progress. Philadelphia publisher C. F. Escher registered the work for copyright protection on January 8, 1867 (see the record on page 22).

Also in 1867, Mrs. Bodell of Washington, DC, registered her musical composition, “Home Run Polka,” in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, as was required under federal copyright law at the time. It was one of the earliest baseball songs dedicated to a specific team: the National Baseball Club of Washington. The Washington Nationals, whose players at the time included government workers, clerks, lawyers, and war veterans, departed that year for baseball’s first “tour of the west,” traveling to Illinois, Missouri, and Ohio.

Today, most major league baseball teams have team songs. Some teams have used songs written specifically about them, such as the Chicago Cubs’ “Go, Cubs, Go,” the New York Mets’ “Meet the Mets,” and the Detroit Tigers’ “Go Get ‘Em Tigers,” among others. Other teams have adopted popular songs with some connection to their location, like the San Francisco Giants’ “I Left My Heart in San Francisco,” New York Yankees’ “New York, New York,” and the Los Angeles Dodgers’ “I Love L.A.” And some teams even use songs with seemingly no connection to pump up the crowd, as with the Boston Red Sox and the song “Sweet Caroline,” which is played in the middle of the eighth inning during every home game.

For musical compositions today, copyright protection begins automatically once the author fixes the work in a tangible medium, such as when composers and lyricists write them down as sheet music. Although registration is not required for copyright protection, registering your creative works with the U.S. Copyright Office provides important legal benefits, including the ability to enforce your rights in federal court or before the Copyright Claims Board. Learn more about what musicians should know about copyright.

Copyright protects everyone’s creative works, whether that work is a song written for your home team or the opposition. The Copyright Office is dedicated to making the copyright system as understandable and accessible to as many members of the public as possible.

Fraud exists in many forms, and the copyright arena is no exception. Creators, businesses, and members of the public engage online with copyright law, registration systems, and licensing practices. Bad actors sometimes exploit misunderstandings about how copyright works and how the U.S. Copyright Office operates. Scams involving copyright can be convincing, costly, and stressful, but knowing how they work is the first step toward avoiding them.

This post explains the U.S. Copyright Office’s role, describes common types of copyright-related fraud, outlines why these schemes are harmful, and offers practical steps to take if you suspect fraud.

What the U.S. Copyright Office Does and Does Not Do

The U.S. Copyright Office, a part of the Library of Congress, administers U.S. copyright law. Its core responsibilities include registering copyrights, recording certain legal documents, maintaining public records, and providing authoritative information about copyright law and policy.

The Office does not sue others for copyright infringement. It does not provide legal advice, demand payment by email or text, threaten lawsuits, or require immediate action to avoid penalties. Understanding these limits can help you identify fraudulent claims.

Common Copyright Fraud Scenarios

Fraudsters often rely on urgency, intimidation, or promises of special access. Below are several examples that reflect common tactics.

The “Immediate Action Required” Email

A small business owner receives an email claiming to be from the U.S. Copyright Office, stating their website infringes a registered photograph. The message warns that failure to pay a “copyright compliance fee” within forty-eight hours will result in fines or criminal penalties. The email includes a convincing logo and an official-looking signature but may be missing an official government email extension. In practice, the Copyright Office does not search for possible infringement on someone else’s behalf and demand immediate payment.

The Fake Registration Service

An independent musician signs up for what appears to be a copyright registration service advertised online. The company charges several hundred dollars and promises “expedited approval” and “legal protection.” The website looks formal and displays a logo that looks official. Weeks later, the musician discovers that no application was filed at all. While private services may help prepare applications, only the U.S. Copyright Office can issue an official registration certificate. All registration applications must proceed through the registration application process provided by the U.S. Copyright Office.

The Phony Licensing Demand

A blogger receives a letter claiming a short excerpt used in a post requires an expensive retroactive license. The sender claims to represent a rightsholder but provides no verifiable contact information. The letter pressures the blogger to pay immediately to avoid being sued. These demands may rely on vague claims, exaggerated damages, or misstatements about fair use.

The Impersonation Phone Call

An author receives a phone call from someone claiming to be a U.S. Copyright Office employee, offering to “fix errors” in a recent application for a fee. The caller asks for payment by gift card. The Copyright Office does not call applicants to request payment or corrections by phone.

Why Falling Victim to Copyright Fraud Is Harmful

Copyright scams can cause direct financial loss, sometimes hundreds or thousands of dollars. They can also lead to identity theft if victims share personal or payment information. Beyond these immediate harms, fraud undermines trust in the copyright system and can discourage creators from registering their works or asserting their rights. For small businesses and individual creators, the stress and confusion caused by fraudulent threats can be particularly damaging.

Warning Signs of Copyright Fraud

Be cautious if you encounter any of the following:

• Urgent demands for immediate payment or threats of legal action.
• Requests for payment by gift card, wire transfer, or cryptocurrency.
• Claims of special access, guaranteed approval, or expedited treatment.
• Messages that appear official but come from unfamiliar email addresses, email extensions, or phone numbers.
• Requests for sensitive personal or financial information.
• Excessive language that encourages trust in an unknown person or entity. Fraudsters pretend to be someone you can trust.

What to Do If You Suspect Fraud

If you believe you have encountered a copyright-related scam, take these steps:

1. 1. 1. Pause and verify. Do not respond or send payment immediately. Scammers rely on urgency.
      2. Check official sources. Visit copyright.gov to learn how the Copyright Office communicates and what services it provides.
      3. Do not share personal information. Avoid providing Social Security numbers, banking details, or passwords to entities not connected with the federal government.
      4. Report the incident. You may report suspected fraud to the Federal Trade Commission at reportfraud.ftc.gov, your state’s attorney general, or the Library of Congress OIG Hotline.
      5. Preserve evidence. Save emails, screenshots, phone numbers, letters, payment receipts, and any links you were sent. This information can help investigators and may be needed by your bank or payment provider.
      6. Seek legal advice if needed. A private attorney can help assess legitimate copyright claims and identify scams. Contact your state or local bar association or local volunteer lawyers for the arts organization for further assistance.
      7. Research the entity using sites like the Better Business Bureau and verify the website.
      8. Use the U.S. Copyright Office Public Records System to search public copyright registration and recordation records. If a legitimate application for a claim to copyright was filed on your behalf, it will be located there if the U.S. Copyright Office registers that claim. For further details, including status inquiries, please contact the U.S. Copyright Office on the Contact Us.
      9. Follow fraud alerts issued by the Library of Congress Office of Inspector General.

    

2. Staying Informed Is Your Best Defense

   Copyright law can be complex, and scammers count on that complexity to deceive. By understanding the U.S. Copyright Office’s role, recognizing common fraud tactics, and knowing how to respond, you can protect yourself and help others do the same. When in doubt, rely on trusted, official sources and take time to verify before taking action. Learn more about the services and resources of the U.S. Copyright Office by visiting copyright.gov.

The following blog is authored by Ashley Tucker, with legal research by Jessica Chinnadurai and Laura Kaiser. 

Over the last several years on January 1, we have witnessed a new class of creative works entering the public domain in the United States. In 2026, a variety of works published in 1930, ranging from motion pictures to music to books, joined others in the public domain. 

What is copyright and how is it different from other types of intellectual property? 

Copyright is a type of intellectual property (IP) that protects original works of authorship as soon as an author fixes the work in a tangible form of expression. Intellectual property rights protect creations of the mind, including copyrightable creative works, inventions protected by patents, brands protected by trademarks, and commercially valuable information protected under trade secret law. Unlike some other areas of IP, which require government action to secure protection, copyright protection is automatic—although registration confers additional benefits. 

Copyright law arises from Article I, section 8 of the Constitution, which grants Congress the power, “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” The Copyright Act describes the exclusive rights of copyright owners :  the right to use and give permission for others to use their work in many ways—making copies of and distributing the work, creating derivative works, and publicly performing or displaying the work. Under the Constitution,  these rights last for “limited times.” The first federal copyright law, dating back to 1790, protected registered works for fourteen years with a fourteen-year renewal option. The law has changed over time, and today, the term of copyright protection lasts for the author’s life plus an additional seventy years. 

When copyright protection ends, a work enters the public domain, and the exclusive rights granted by copyright no longer exist. This means that without a need to seek permission, a work may be reproduced, may be performed or displayed publicly, and may also be used in the creation of new works, such as adaptations and translations. However, even when copyright protection ends and a work is in the public domain, it is important to note that it may still be subject to other protections.

Below are just a few of the historical and cultural works that entered the public domain in 2026. 

LITERARY WORKS 

The Maltese Falcon  

Dashiell Hammett was an American writer and former detective whose real-world investigative experiences shaped his writings. In 1930, he published the book The Maltese Falcon: a crime novel that follows private detective Sam Spade as he navigates a dangerous search for a legendary jewel-encrusted statuette.  

Hammett and his publisher, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., signed a contract giving Warner Bros. the exclusive right to use his novel in film, television, and radio, which resulted in the 1941 film of the same name. Hammett and Knopf later gave CBS the exclusive right to use the novel’s Sam Spade character. Warner Brothers objected and sued for copyright infringement.  

The appellate court reviewing the case briefly considered a character’s role in a story and to what extent copyright law intends for characters to be protected. A film prop of the Maltese Falcon is featured in the Find Yourself in Copyright exhibit in the Library of Congress Madison building. 

As I Lay Dying   

As I Lay Dying is a modernist novel by William Faulkner that follows the Burden family’s difficult journey to bury their matriarch. Faulkner, a Mississippi-born writer, is known for the creative risks he took. He often told stories from many points of view, used stream of consciousness writing, and based much of his writing on a detailed, fictional version of his home region.  

His deep ties to the South and his interest in how people think and behave shaped the way he wrote this work. The story is told through a series of deeply personal narrators who explore themes of grief, identity, and the harsh realities of rural Southern life. After it was published, the novel became one of his most famous works. The 1949 Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded to Faulkner “for his powerful and artistically unique contribution to the modern American novel.”   

Books in The Nancy Drew Series: The Secret of the Old Clock, The Hidden Staircase, The Bungalow Mystery, The Mystery at Lilac Inn 

Mildred Wirt Benson, under the pseudonym Carolyn Keene, authored twenty-three of the first thirty books in the Nancy Drew series: a long-running collection of mystery novels for young readers. These early books introduced the core aspects of Nancy Drew’s character: a clever, courageous girl determined to help others and unravel mysteries.   

Benson modeled Nancy Drew after her own bold spirit and independent mindset. Benson was an adventurous Iowa native and one of the first women to earn a master’s degree in journalism from the University of Iowa. Only late in life did she receive public recognition for her role in shaping one of America’s most well-known fictional heroines. 

Titles entering the public domain:  

The Secret of the Old Clock: The very first Nancy Drew mystery, which introduced Nancy as a daring teenager actively pursuing justice.  

The Hidden Staircase: The second book in the series, which deepened the series’ signature blend of suspense and female empowerment.  

The Bungalow Mystery: The third book in the series, which expanded Nancy’s world with more complex clues.  

The Mystery at Lilac Inn: The fourth book in the series, which sharpened the tone of danger and investigation.  

MOTION PICTURES 

Animal Crackers   

The comedy film, which stars Groucho, Harpo, Chico, and Zeppo Marx (the stage names for the siblings collectively known as the Marx Brothers), centers on a lavish party at a wealthy Long Island estate. At the party, a valuable painting goes missing, setting off a series of comedic events and slapstick antics as the Marx Brothers try to find it.  

Animal Crackers marked the Marx Brothers’ second screen appearance and the last film they shot at Paramount’s Astoria Studios in New York before moving their work to Hollywood. The film was adapted directly from a 1928 Broadway musical play. The play was written by George S. Kaufman, Bert Kalmar, Morrie Ryskind, and Harry Ruby and was registered with the U.S. Copyright Office as an unpublished work in 1929 (also now in the public domain).  

Soup to Nuts  

Soup to Nuts, written by famed cartoonist and inventor Rube Goldberg, follows a struggling costume shop whose eccentric owner spends more time creating absurd inventions than running the business. The film marks the screen debut of Moe Howard, Larry Fine, and Shemp Howard, who eventually evolve into the Three Stooges, one of America’s most famous comedy teams. Their appearances showcase early versions of the rapid-fire, physical comedy, and ensemble timing that would later define their career.  

MUSICAL WORKS 

I Got Rhythm  

The song was written by George Gershwin for the 1930 musical Girl Crazy by J. McGowan and G. Bolton. With its simple thirty-two-bar AABA structure and distinctive chord progression, the song’s form and harmony have been reused and re-imagined in hundreds of jazz tunes, including by famous artists such as Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong. Even its composer revisited the piece:  Gershwin later expanded the song into a symphonic work titled Variations on I Got Rhythm. 

By Shira Perlmutter, Register of Copyrights and Director of the U.S. Copyright Office

As the year draws to a close, I am pleased to recognize an impressive slate of accomplishments at the U.S. Copyright Office. Despite some challenges, including a lengthy government shutdown, the Office continued to produce high-quality work and reliable service to the public—from policy analyses to technology updates; efficient registration, recordation and deposit; and education and outreach. I am grateful for the opportunity to lead such a skilled and dedicated staff.

A central policy focus of the year was further work on the Office’s comprehensive artificial intelligence initiative. In January, we published Part 2 of our report, Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, addressing the copyrightability of works generated using AI. In May, we released a pre-publication version of Part 3, addressing the ingestion of copyrighted works for generative AI training.

A particularly exciting development has been in the area of IT modernization: the launch of more components of the Enterprise Copyright System (ECS). The Office engaged in a successful limited pilot with members of the public of both the eDeposit upload functionality and our most-used registration form, the Standard Application. The development teams are implementing the feedback received, and work has begun on the first ECS group registration application. We also launched the ECS licensing component, which improves the Office’s internal capabilities in administering section 111 of the Copyright Act.

Another ECS component, the new and improved Copyright Public Records System (CPRS), replaced our legacy system as the official Office record in June. More and more pre-1978 historical public records have been digitized and published, with 19,135 copyright record books now available online, amounting to more than 72 percent of the total collection.

The Office also made strides in administration and public service. Our small claims court, the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), completed its third full year, offering a more accessible option for resolving copyright disputes below a certain monetary value. The Office published a rule expediting the process for obtaining a certification of a final determination and initiated a study of the CCB’s operations to be delivered to Congress in 2026.

Our public information and education programs continued to grow. The Office hosted or participated in 190 events and speaking engagements and assisted the public, in both English and Spanish, with responses to 247,484 inquiries in-person and by phone, email, and other communications. We launched a new Registration Toolkit and a Copyright for Kids activity sheet. In September, the Office hosted the International Copyright Institute, our premier weeklong training event for foreign copyright officials, coproduced with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

This fall, we responded to a Congressional request on issues relating to performance rights organizations (PROs). And earlier in December, we announced a new group registration option for two-dimensional artwork, responding to the needs of visual artists. The Office also has taken forward the periodic review, mandated by the Music Modernization Act, of the mechanical licensing collective (MLC) and digital licensee coordinator (DLC), to be completed in 2026.

On the litigation front, the Office worked with the Department of Justice to develop and articulate positions in copyright-related cases. One major win was an appellate decision affirming the Office’s rejection of an application to register a work claimed to be produced entirely by artificial intelligence. The D.C. Circuit agreed with our view that human authorship is required for copyright protection.

Collaboration with and advising other federal agencies was again a key part of our interagency work in the international arena. This included participating in WIPO meetings on copyright and contributing to the U.S. Trade Representative’s annual Special 301 Report.

Concurrent with all of this activity, the Office’s provision of our regular services continued apace. Despite furloughs during the six-week lapse in appropriations, we issued 415,780 registrations and recorded 12,310 documents containing 5,704,306 works in fiscal year 2025. All the while, we maintained historically low processing times. We also received and transferred 503,389 copyright deposits, worth more than $57.8 million, to Library of Congress collections.

The Copyright Office remains committed to advancing copyright law and policy and supporting stakeholders in the creation and use of works of authorship. The work of the past year demonstrates the value of a resilient institution, grounded in expertise and public service. We look forward to further achievements in 2026.

Using this refreshed resource, kids can learn what copyright is and what rights copyright owners have:

• Coloring and searching activities help kids learn what subject matter is protectable by copyright.
• Mazes trace a path from idea to authorship and copyright owner.
• Spot-the-difference activities feature the Statue of Liberty (one of the largest works ever registered).
• Prompts direct kids to create their very own original story or drawing.

All ages will learn that everyone is a copyright owner, everyone is a copyright user, there is no minimum age to being a copyright owner, and creators of any age have the option to register their works with the Copyright Office[1].

This interactive resource supports one of the Office’s primary goals: making the copyright system as easy to understand for as many people as possible.

Copyright for Kids Activity Sheets are available on the Copyright Office’s website to print at home. To learn more about copyright and Copyright Office services, schedule a visit to the Office’s exhibit or request a speaker for classrooms and beyond.

[1] Adults should note that the registration application requires a fee, and that some personal information of the copyright holder will later be visible online if approved. For more information, see Copyright Registration (Circular 2) and  Privacy: Public Copyright Registration Records (Circular 18).

1. Copyright Registration Toolkit 

This year, the Office released the Copyright Registration Toolkit, which offers a visual breakdown of copyright, including essential information about copyright law, how to prepare for registration, what to expect during the process, and post-registration considerations. The toolkit provides a comprehensive resource for creators making business decisions about their works as well as for advisors who help guide them in understanding their rights as intellectual property (IP) owners. 

Learn more about all areas of IP by visiting our IP Toolkits page.  

2. Application Walk Through

The Copyright Office offers walk through appointments—a free service during which a representative guides you step-by-step through the electronic registration application over the phone. These thirty-minute sessions are available weekdays (excluding federal holidays) and must be scheduled in advance.  

To make the most of your appointment, you’ll need to create an Electronic Copyright Office (eCO) account beforehand. We also recommend that you watch the Office’s brief tutorial videos and review key circulars for background information.   

Learn more and book your session with our Walk Through Request Form.  

3. Speaker Request Form:  

If you’re looking for a copyright expert to present at your next conference, you can use our Speaker Request Form to invite a representative from the Office to share their expertise in copyright matters with your group. The Office welcomes invitations to present on topics such as copyright basics, the Copyright Claims Board, and resources for entrepreneurs. Submit your request today!  

4. Find Yourself in Copyright Exhibit 

Located in the James Madison Memorial Building in Washington, DC, our Find Yourself in Copyright exhibit explores the evolution of U.S. copyright law and how the millions of copyright claims registered with the Office illustrate the deep and varied nature of original works. The exhibit features historic copyright claims, including one of the most famous sculptural works of art ever registered for copyright: the Statue of Liberty.  

Schedule an in-person tour for your group or visit the exhibit online to learn about the story of copyright in the United States and the role of the Copyright Office.   

 5. Copyright for Kids 

When fixed in a tangible form, even a child’s creative work is protected by copyright and can be submitted to the Copyright Office for registration. It’s never too early for kids to learn about the rights afforded to them under copyright law.  

Take a look at our Copyright for Kids resource, which includes educational worksheet activities such as mazes and word puzzles for our young creators and their parents and educators.   

Whether you’re registering a work, teaching a class, or delving into the history of copyright, the Office encourages you to explore how these offerings can support your creative journey. 

The U.S. Copyright Office recently released the Copyright Registration Toolkit: a highly visual guide that breaks down key steps and concepts to help creators navigate the copyright system. The toolkit was designed for authors, artists, musicians, and others as they manage their own creative works as well as for business and legal advisors who support creators in copyright registration.   

The project was led by Attorney-Advisor Jessica Chinnadurai, who I sat down with to explore this new resource. 

What is the Office’s new Copyright Registration Toolkit? What information can creators find in the Toolkit? 

The toolkit has six sections with a little something for everyone. If you’re beginning your copyright journey, section 1 helps lay the groundwork. You can find details about what is and isn’t protected by copyright, how long copyright lasts, and the benefits of copyright registration. Section 2 is also foundational. A flowchart illustrates the steps in the registration process, including the potential timing of each step.  

If you’re already familiar with copyright registration, the toolkit has tons of practical information. For example, section 4 is a one-page list of resources available to applicants in the middle of filing a copyright registration. These include video tutorials on eCO (the Electronic Copyright Office Registration System), eCO FAQS, and help text. You can also find an email address and phone number for technical help. Another valuable tool highlighted is our walk through service. During this appointment, staff members in our Public Information Office can help you navigate an application step by step.  

One of my favorite aspects of the toolkit is that almost every page contains links to more Office resources. Keep an eye out for a cursor icon, which serves as a guidepost. 

Why did the Office create the Copyright Registration Toolkit? What goal does the toolkit set out to achieve for the Office? 

Copyright law can seem complex, so our main goal is to make it accessible and understandable. That’s why we started with a visual representation of how copyright is all around us. In a familiar scene at a desk, you might find an animal statuette that is protectable as a sculpture. Perhaps you read online blogs or handbooks, which are protectable as literary works. Or you might listen to music and watch videos, which are protectable as performing arts works. 

As you learn more about copyright from the toolkit, the idea is that you’ll be better able to distinguish it from other types of intellectual property (IP). To help round out your knowledge, you can read IP toolkits for trademarks and trade secrets developed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Together, these resources help creators and advisors better understand the entire IP system. For example, I often encounter people who are unsure or confused about where to go to get a registration. Another reason the toolkit was created is to ensure that you know copyright registration is only available at the U.S. Copyright Office. The USPTO grants patents and handles federal trademark registration. 

What types of users were in mind when creating the Copyright Registration Toolkit? 

We considered individuals and small business owners navigating the copyright system by themselves. Another group we kept in mind was advisors who might be assisting them in a variety of ways.   

Advisors can pass the toolkit along as a self-guided resource or use it in meetings with clients. Many people are curious about what happens after a registration is submitted to the Office, and section 5 can help demystify the process. We designed it to provide a sneak peek into the mind of an assigned specialist making an initial decision to approve or refuse a registration. Additionally, a diagram shows the official channels of communication that the Office will use during the process. Advisors can use section 6 to help clarify or plan what to do after someone uses a work without the copyright owner’s permission. We also included reminders throughout the toolkit that advisors are well-positioned to amplify.  

If someone doesn’t have a trusted advisor, though, we designed section 3 to be self-empowering. It outlines a set of questions to ask when preparing for copyright registration. At a baseline, you’ll want to know what type of work and how many you want to register. A more advanced question focuses on the publication status of your work. In this way, section 3 can be a useful checklist. Plus, addressing these important considerations might help you save time and money. 

Where should people go to learn more or if they have questions that aren’t answered by the Copyright Registration Toolkit? 

Outside of the toolkit, the first step is to visit our website, copyright.gov, where we have more resources on copyright. We are always working to keep them up to date and add more tools to help copyright owners and users be successful. Also, the Public Information Office is open between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. eastern time, Monday to Friday, excluding federal holidays. You can call in or email your questions, and staff members are ready to connect with you. 

The Office created the Copyright Registration Toolkit as part of one of its top priorities, Copyright for All, which asks us to make the copyright system as understandable and accessible to as many members of the public as possible. The toolkit covers the gamut of crucial information copyright owners and their advisors should know, making it possible for them to exercise their rights and make informed business decisions. 

The capabilities of the latest generative AI technologies raise significant questions about the nature and scope of human authorship—including in music. In early 2023, the U.S. Copyright Office launched an initiative exploring the intersection of copyright and artificial intelligence. In August 2023, the Office formally sought public input on the full range of copyright issues that have been raised by generative AI, receiving more than 10,000 comments from all 50 states and from 67 countries representing a broad range of perspectives. After reviewing these comments, the Office began working on a Report for Congress and the public, which can be found online at copyright.gov/ai.

To discuss the Office’s findings and latest decisions, Miriam Lord, Associate Register of Copyrights and Director of Public Information and Education, sat down with two colleagues, Senior Counsel Chris Weston and Assistant General Counsel Jalyce Mangum.

Miriam Lord (ML): Chris, what makes the U.S. copyright system unique when it comes to AI?

Chris Weston (CW): Original works of expression are protected under national laws, with protection in a particular country dependent on that country’s laws. International copyright conventions and treaties, like those through WIPO, establish obligations that provide more certainty about protection levels across countries.

When we talk about music, it’s important to understand that even in a single song, with rights in both the musical composition and sound recording, these rights are often divided among multiple rightsholders.

U.S. copyright law differs from copyright laws of other countries in several ways, including that it creates a system where applications to register copyrights are examined at the Office. Registration is not mandatory, but it does provide significant benefits. When it comes to copyrightability issues, including works containing AI-generated material, the Office is a kind of “natural laboratory” because our examiners deal with these issues daily.

ML:  Jalyce, tell us about the Office’s study on AI and copyright law.

Jalyce Mangum (JM): The Office launched a broad AI initiative to address these emerging questions and issued guidance to help authors understand how to apply for copyright registration when their works included AI-generated material. We hosted public listening sessions and webinars, met with experts and stakeholders, and published a notice of inquiry seeking input from the public.

After reviewing more than 10,000 comments—an astounding response that helped inform our conclusions—we began working on a Report for Congress and the public. We published Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 1: Digital Replicas, on July 31, 2024. Part 2: Copyrightability, published January 29, 2025, focuses on the copyrightability of outputs created using generative AI. The Office will issue subsequent Parts on the legal implications of training AI models on copyright-protected works, including licensing considerations and the allocation of potential liability.

ML: What were some of the common concerns the music community raised during the Office’s consultations?

JM: The feedback from performers, songwriters, composers, publishers, record labels, trade organizations, and advocacy groups was crucial in designing a comprehensive approach for our recommendations. Their concerns focused on five themes but also concurred with the broad consensus about safeguarding creatives and their works.

Specifically, their comments centered first on human authorship and AI’s impact on human creativity. Second, labor effects—they fear that rapidly generated AI content could overwhelm human-authored works in the marketplace. Third, they want control and compensation for the use of both their personas and copyright-protected works. Fourth, they recognize innovation aspects—that AI can assist the creative process and even enable performances by deceased artists. Finally, regarding licensing, they consider what type should be preferred: voluntary, collective, or compulsory. In short, should they have to opt in or opt out?

ML: What are unauthorized digital replicas, and what approach does the Office recommend?

JM: In 2023, a song dropped that appeared to feature the voices of Drake and The Weeknd, drawing more than 15 million social media views and 600,000 listens on Spotify. This “Fake Drake” incident, as some called it, showed how rapidly generative AI technology has become sophisticated and accessible enough that minimal expertise is required to produce convincing digital replicas.

Throughout our study, we heard from members of the music industry that they worried they would lose income due to the surge of voice clones or that the use of AI in sound recordings could displace human labor.

In the United States, a patchwork of laws governs individuals’ likeness and voice rights, but there are gaps and inconsistencies in who is protected and against what types of conduct. We concluded there was an urgent need for a new federal right protecting all people—not just celebrities—from the unauthorized use of their likeness and voice.

ML: The Office recently registered a sound recording by Grammy-winning artist Randy Travis. Using his AI-assisted recording as an example, how do you distinguish between AI as a creative tool versus a substitute for human creativity?

JM: Artists have used technology for decades to enhance, modify, and add to their creations—that isn’t new, nor is the requirement for human authorship to secure copyright protection. The Office has registered more than a thousand works where applicants have followed our guidance to disclose and disclaim AI-generated material. In the copyrightability analysis, distinguishing between using AI as a tool to assist in the creation of works and using AI to stand in for human creativity is important. The difference is whether AI is enhancing human expression or is the source of the expressive choices.

In Part 2 of our Report, the Office affirmed that copyright does not extend to purely AI-generated material or material where there is insufficient human control over the expressive elements.

Randy Travis’s recent sound recording, “Where That Came From,” featuring an AI clone of his voice, is a good example of AI assistive use. Due to health challenges, Travis has limited speech function, but to realize the dream of a new record, a production team took the vocal track of a human singer and used AI as a tool to modify the sounds to match Travis’s iconic voice.

ML: Let’s zoom back out to the international context. Chris, how are other countries approaching these copyright issues with AI?

CW: We’re aware we can’t confine our attention to within U.S. borders since AI systems are trained, developed, and deployed around the world. Other countries are also considering these issues, and while identical approaches are unlikely, some level of consistency will contribute to smooth global commerce.

We are seeing similarities and differences in how countries are approaching these issues. In the United States, copyright protection requires human authorship, and other countries follow that model as well.

In China, a court recently recognized copyright in a picture created using AI, finding a human author exercised sufficient creativity in prompting the AI tool and then revising the output. And South Korea has registered an AI-created film as a compilation, based on the human creativity that went into the selection, coordination, and arrangement of its AI-generated components.

We continue to discuss ideas and experiences with our global counterparts. Areas of consensus are emerging and so are potential differences.

ML: Thanks, you two. Certainly a lot to dive into.

But speaking of deep dives, the Copyright Office maintains a central resource for copyright creators and users in music: Engage Your Creativity: What Musicians Should Know About Copyright.

This resource provides an overview of copyright law and protections available in the music context and includes videos and handouts. It addresses the two types of copyright-protected works in a recorded song, the process for copyright registration, and considerations when using someone else’s work. We also cover what a copyright owner can to do if a work is used unlawfully and provide an overview how the Music Modernization Act helps songwriters get paid.

Copyright law protects musical works and sound recordings the moment the artist fixes their creative work in a tangible format—for example, when a musical composition is notated in sheet music or a song is recorded in an audio file. That protection comes with exclusive rights giving copyright owners control over the use of their works, including the rights to publicly distribute and perform them, with public performances of sound recordings limited to digital audio transmissions. Anyone wishing to use the work in these ways must have the copyright owner’s permission, a licensing contract, or rely on a limitation or exception provided in the Copyright Act. Registering a musical work or sound recording with the Copyright Office is not required, but doing so provides additional benefits.

To learn more, visit us at copyright.gov.