Market-Based Licensing for Publishers’ Works Is Feasible. Big Tech Agrees.

Generative AI (“GAI”) model developers prioritized speed to market over compliance with copyright law with respect to use of copyrighted works for training their models. Now facing over forty lawsuits, they have asserted fair use to evade responsibility, and they claim that licensing all necessary works is impossible. This Article focuses on professionally created works only, with an emphasis on publishers’ works, and demonstrates that market-based licensing of professionally created works for training GAI models is feasible as measured by the number of licenses and the ability of GAI developers to afford them—both of which are points on which Big Tech agrees. The Article also provides insights on the licensing marketplace for publishers’ works as relevant to training GAI models. Finally, the Article underscores that the public interest is squarely on the side of marketbased licensing because all stakeholders benefit, and it will help ensure that publishers and authors may continue their vital contributions to America’s political, intellectual, and cultural systems.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts
Published
2025-05-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.52214/jla.v48i4.13925
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Library Collection Development and Digital Resources
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.25
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Market-Based Licensing for Publishers’ Works Is Feasible. Big Tech Agrees.

M. Stratton
1 citations
The Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts
Library Collection Development and Digital Resources
3.25
article

Market-Based Licensing for Publishers’ Works Is Feasible. Big Tech Agrees.

M. Stratton
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Generative AI (“GAI”) model developers prioritized speed to market over compliance with copyright law with respect to use of copyrighted works for training their models. Now facing over forty lawsuits, they have asserted fair use to evade responsibility, and they claim that licensing all necessary works is impossible. This Article focuses on professionally created works only, with an emphasis on publishers’ works, and demonstrates that market-based licensing of professionally created works for training GAI models is feasible as measured by the number of licenses and the ability of GAI developers to afford them—both of which are points on which Big Tech agrees. The Article also provides insights on the licensing marketplace for publishers’ works as relevant to training GAI models. Finally, the Article underscores that the public interest is squarely on the side of marketbased licensing because all stakeholders benefit, and it will help ensure that publishers and authors may continue their vital contributions to America’s political, intellectual, and cultural systems.

The Columbia Journal of Law & the ArtsVol. 48(4)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Library Collection Development and Digital Resources
3.25
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Market-Based Licensing for Publishers’ Works Is Feasible. Big Tech Agrees. — M. Stratton · The Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS