AI, Copyright, and Control: Why I Contributed to the Copyright AI Framework Consultation

A Familiar Battle: Protecting Creativity in the Age of AI

As I contributed to the Copyright AI Framework Consultation, I was immediately transported back to 2018—the year I wrote my best-selling book,?She Disrupts a Black Women's Journey in STEM and AI Industries. I remember the fire I felt then—the urgency to ensure Black women were not left behind in the AI revolution.

Now, in 2025, I feel that same passion. AI rapidly transforms industries, and marginalised voices risk being sidelined again. This time, the fight is over who controls creative content in an AI-driven world.

AI-generated content—whether art, music, writing, or data—relies on vast amounts of existing creative work. But here's the critical question:

Should AI developers be able to train models on copyrighted content without permission or payment?

The answer is complex, but one thing is clear—creators must have control.

Why I Support Option 3: Control, Transparency, and Licensing

The consultation proposed several options, but Option 3 is the only absolute path forward. Why? Because it:

? Allows AI to innovate while protecting creators' rights.

? Requires AI developers to disclose what content they use—ensuring transparency.

? Gives creators the right to opt-out or license their work rather than having it taken without consent.

This balanced approach ensures that Black artists, writers, musicians, and creators are protected from exploitation by AI systems that scrape their work without offering credit or compensation.

I refused to let Black women be excluded from tech advancements in 2018, and I refuse to let it happen now. AI cannot be built on our backs without including us in the profits and decision-making.

The Problem with No Regulation: Unchecked AI Exploitation

Some argue that AI should be free to use any data available—essentially allowing companies to take copyrighted material without licensing. This is dangerous for several reasons:

1)?Loss of Creator Control and if AI can freely train on books, art, or music, what stops it from exploiting entire creative industries without fair pay?

2)? Exclusion of Marginalised Voices and, historically, how?Black creators have struggled for recognition and compensation. Allowing AI to mine our culture, language, and work without protection repeats the cycle of erasure and exploitation.

3) Lack of transparency often plays out here, especially when AI companies refuse to disclose the data used for training. ??How can we challenge bias or theft if we don't even know what's being used?

This is why Option 3 is essential. It balances requiring AI developers to be transparent and accountable and allowing technological progress.

Beyond CopyrightCopyright, the real issue for me is what this Means for Black Women in AI.

As I wrote in She Disrupts, AI is not neutral. It reflects the biases of the data on which it is trained. If the voices of Black women are missing from AI's datasets, the technology will continue to overlook, misrepresent, or undervalue us.

This consultation was about more than CopyrightCopyright—it was about who would participate in the future economy. AI can devalue human creativity without licensing protections and disproportionately harm marginalised creators.

We've already seen how AI-powered hiring tools discriminate against Black women, how facial recognition misidentifies us, and how algorithmic bias affects everything from healthcare to finance.

If we do not set the right policies now, AI will become just another tool of exclusion.

A Call to Action: Where Do We Go from Here?

#SheDisrupts 1 - Transparency Should Be Non-Negotiable, and AI developers must disclose what data they use. We deserve to know if our work is being exploited.

#SheDisrupts 2 - Fair Compensation for Creators, where licensing models should be built into AI frameworks, ensuring that those whose work trains AI get paid for it.

#SheDisrupts 3 - Representation in AI Policy for Black women and other underrepresented groups must have a voice in decisions about AI regulation.

Final #SheDisrupts Thoughts: Why This Fight Is Personal

Contributing to this consultation was not just about policy for me. It continued my mission, which led me to write the best-selling book She Disrupts a Black Women's Journey in STEM and AI Industries.

Just as I fought then to ensure Black women had a place in AI and STEM, I fight now to ensure that we are protected, valued, and included in the AI-driven future.

If we let AI take creative content without permission, we risk devaluing human creativity altogether.

If we allow unregulated AI, we risk building a future that excludes the voices that need to be heard the most.

I just wanted to let you know that now is the time to act. I stand firmly behind Option 3—the balanced approach that protects creators and AI progress.

?? What do you think? Should AI-generated content require licensing? Drop your thoughts in the comments!

#SheDisrupts #AIandEthics #DigitalInclusion #BlackWomenInAI #ResponsibleAI