Bill · S. 3813· Senate(119-S-3813)
CLEAR Act
- Introduced
- 2/10/2026
- Last activity
- 2/10/2026 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- Adam Schiff
- Cosponsors
- - 0 - 1
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The CLEAR Act requires individuals or entities using copyrighted works in training datasets for generative AI models to submit a notice to the Register of Copyrights. This notice must include a detailed summary of each copyrighted work and a URL if the dataset is publicly available on the internet. The notice must be filed before the AI model is commercially used or released. The Register of Copyrights is tasked with creating regulations and maintaining a public database of these notices. If the notice is not submitted, copyright owners can take legal action. The bill also establishes civil penalties and potential injunctions for non-compliance.
Yes· 3 of 4
Does this put more rules on large technology companies?+5
The bill imposes new mandatory disclosure and reporting requirements on entities developing generative AI models.
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+4
The bill mandates the creation of a public online database of AI training dataset notices maintained by the Register of Copyrights.
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?+3
The bill enhances transparency regarding the data used to build generative AI models, which can protect consumers' interests in information accuracy.
The opposite
Would business owners be better off under this?-4
The bill imposes significant compliance burdens, potential civil penalties of up to $2.5 million, and risk of injunctions on businesses using AI training datasets.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Transparency for Copyright Owners: Under Section 2(b)(1)(A), the requirement for a "sufficiently detailed summary of each copyrighted work in the training dataset" allows for better visibility into what is being used to build AI models.
-
Public Access to Information: Section 2(d) mandates that the Register establish and maintain a "publicly available online database" containing the submitted notices, which provides transparency to the public.
-
Legal Recourse for Creators: Section 2(c)(1) allows the "owner of the copyrighted work" to bring an action in a district court if a person uses a copyrighted work in a training dataset without submitting the required notice.
-
Financial Redress and Accountability: Section 2(c)(2)(A) allows courts to impose civil penalties of at least $5,000 per instance, and Section 2(c)(2)(C) allows for the award of "attorney's fees and expenses" to the copyright owner.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Compliance Deadlines and Burdens: Section 2(b)(2) requires that notices be submitted "not later than 30 days before" a model is used commercially or released, creating specific timing requirements that entities must follow.
-
Financial Penalties: Under Section 2(c)(2)(A), persons failing to submit the notice may be required to pay civil penalties of "not less than $5,000 for each instance," with total annual penalties potentially reaching "$2,500,000" per person.
-
Operational Interruptions: Section 2(c)(2)(B) allows courts to issue an injunction that "requires the person... to stop using the applicable work" until the required notice is submitted.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Education And Technology
- Increases Big Tech Regulation+5
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+4
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For High Income Households+1Good For Business Owners-4
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Consumer Protection+3
- 2/10/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
John CurtisRepublican · Utah