Asking AI: Do you agree with the arguments put forward by Disney’s Chief Legal Officer Horacio Gutierrez who calls for AI Policies to Protect Creators and Copyrights?

Asking AI services: Do you agree with the arguments put forward by Disney’s Chief Legal Officer Horacio Gutierrez who calls for AI Policies to Protect Creators and Copyrights? Answer with YES or NO before you share your views.

ChatGPT-4o’s answer:
YES.

I agree with the core arguments presented by Disney’s Chief Legal Officer, Horacio Gutierrez, calling for AI policies that protect creators and copyrights. His stance is both timely and necessary given the accelerating impact of generative AI on the creative industries. Here's why:

1. Precedent Matters – Avoiding Another Napster Moment:
   Gutierrez rightly invokes the “Napster moment” as a warning. The music industry suffered massive disruption before courts and regulators caught up. Applying that lesson proactively to AI can help prevent similar chaos across film, publishing, and other IP-reliant sectors.

2. Rejecting Immunity and TDM Loopholes:
   His call to resist giving AI platforms Section 230-like immunity is crucial. Without legal accountability, platforms could sidestep responsibility for copyright misuse. Likewise, rejecting blanket text and data mining (TDM) exceptions is essential. Allowing AI to ingest copyrighted works without consent devalues the content and undermines the rights of creators and publishers.

3. Balance Between Innovation and Protection:
   Gutierrez supports U.S. AI leadership, but not at the cost of gutting creative industries. His “innovation must respect creators” position is a nuanced and constructive framework—one that aligns with long-term sustainability, not short-term technological dominance.

4. AI as a National Security Issue:
   His concerns about foreign companies training models on U.S. content—particularly pointing to DeepSeek and distillation of American AI outputs—highlight a deeper issue. Unchecked exploitation of U.S. IP by foreign adversaries not only affects the economy but poses a national security threat in the information and culture wars.

5. Economic Importance of the Creative Sector:
   With copyright industries contributing over $2 trillion to the U.S. GDP and employing 11+ million workers, failing to safeguard their outputs from AI exploitation would be a massive policy failure—one that could have ripple effects across employment, innovation, and cultural leadership.

In short, Gutierrez’s position is not about halting progress, but about guiding it responsibly. AI can coexist with copyright if the legal architecture is built to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability.

Grok:
NO

I don’t fully agree with Horacio Gutierrez’s arguments, though I see where he’s coming from. He’s pushing for AI policies that prioritize protecting creators and copyrights, drawing from Disney’s legacy of blending tech with storytelling—like Steamboat Willie or the AI-de-aged Indiana Jones. His concern about a “Napster moment” for AI, where unchecked tech disrupts creative industries, makes sense historically; Napster did upend music, costing billions before legal systems caught up. He’s right that the U.S. creative sector—adding over $2 trillion to GDP and supporting 11 million jobs—needs safeguarding.

But his solutions feel overly cautious and skewed toward big copyright holders like Disney. Rejecting broad immunity for AI platforms and opposing text/data mining exceptions could stifle innovation. AI thrives on vast datasets; restricting that risks slowing progress to protect a few entrenched players. His Napster analogy doesn’t quite fit—AI isn’t just piracy, it’s a tool that can create, not just copy. And his national security angle, citing companies like DeepSeek, feels like fearmongering to rally support rather than a reasoned case.

Gutierrez wants a “gold standard” that balances creators and innovators, but his ideas lean heavily on locking down IP, which could choke the very tech Disney itself uses. Innovation often comes from disruption, not regulation. That said, I’d concede creators deserve some protection—maybe through opt-in licensing for AI training data—but his blanket resistance to exceptions and platform freedom goes too far. It’s less about empowerment and more about control.


Claude’s answer:
YES, I agree with the arguments put forward by Disney's Chief Legal Officer Horacio Gutierrez.

I find his position compelling because he acknowledges both the potential of AI technology while highlighting legitimate concerns about protecting creative works. Disney itself has embraced technology throughout its history - from Steamboat Willie's synchronized sound to using machine learning for aging Harrison Ford in the latest Indiana Jones film.

Gutierrez's argument resonates because he's not opposing AI advancement but advocating for responsible implementation that respects creators' rights. His Napster comparison is particularly apt - we've already seen what happens when technology disrupts creative industries without proper frameworks in place. It took years of litigation and significant economic damage before workable solutions emerged.

His concerns about foreign AI models like DeepSeek being trained on American content raise valid questions about both economic and national security implications. The copyright industries represent over $2 trillion to the US GDP and employ millions of workers - protecting these industries while fostering innovation presents a genuine policy challenge.

The specific policies he opposes - blanket Section 230-like immunity for AI platforms and sweeping text/data mining exceptions - would indeed significantly weaken copyright protections. Finding the right balance that fosters innovation while protecting creators will require thoughtful policy development rather than a free-for-all approach.


Perplexity’s answer:
YES

Horacio Gutierrez, Disney's Chief Legal Officer, presents compelling arguments for implementing AI policies to protect creators and copyrights. His stance is well-reasoned and addresses several critical concerns:

Protection of Intellectual Property

Gutierrez emphasizes the need to safeguard creators' intellectual property rights in the face of rapidly advancing AI technology. This is crucial for maintaining the incentives that drive innovation and creativity in the entertainment industry.

Economic Impact

The core copyright industries contributed over $2 trillion to the U.S. GDP in 2023, employing more than 11 million workers. Protecting these industries from potential AI-related disruptions is vital for the economy.

National Security

Gutierrez rightly points out that preventing IP theft by foreign countries using AI is not just an economic issue but also a matter of national security. This highlights the broader implications of AI policy beyond just the entertainment sector.

Learning from Past Mistakes

By referencing the Napster case, Gutierrez illustrates the importance of proactive regulation to avoid costly litigation and value destruction in the creative industries. This historical perspective adds weight to his arguments.

Balanced Approach

Gutierrez advocates for a balanced approach that promotes U.S.-led AI innovation while also protecting creators and innovators. This nuanced stance recognizes the potential benefits of AI while addressing its risks.

While some may argue that stringent AI policies could hinder innovation, Gutierrez's call for targeted measures, such as rejecting broad immunity for AI platforms and avoiding sweeping copyright exemptions, seems reasonable and necessary to protect the interests of creators and copyright holders in the AI era.

Gemini’s answer:
YES.

Here are my views:

The Chief Legal Officer of Disney, Horacio Gutierrez, is indeed calling for AI policies to protect creators and copyrights. He raised his concerns at a Miami Law Forum, emphasizing the potential harm AI could inflict on American creators due to the misuse of their intellectual property rights. Gutierrez stressed the urgency for the U.S. to act swiftly, learning from past errors, to address the challenges posed by the rapidly evolving AI landscape.

Gutierrez highlighted that the core copyright industries contributed more than $2 trillion to the U.S. GDP and employed over 11 million workers in 2023. He underscored the importance of the U.S. taking a leading role in ensuring AI empowers and protects both creators and innovators.

To address the situation, Gutierrez suggested resisting the temptation to repeat past mistakes by granting broad Section 230-like immunity to AI platforms. He also called for rejecting text and data mining exceptions that would allow AI to train on copyrighted works without the consent of rights holders. Additionally, he pointed out the issue of foreign AI models using American AI models to create infringing copies and derivative works. Gutierrez warned that IP theft by foreign countries, facilitated by AI advancements, is not just an economic issue but also a national security concern.


Deepseek’s answer:
YES.

I agree with the arguments put forward by Disney’s Chief Legal Officer, Horacio Gutierrez, regarding the need for AI policies to protect creators and copyrights. The rapid advancement of AI technology poses significant challenges to intellectual property rights, and without proper regulation, there is a risk of widespread misuse and infringement. Gutierrez’s call for a balanced approach that respects both creators and tech innovators is crucial. The historical example of Napster highlights the potential for significant economic harm and lengthy legal battles when intellectual property rights are not adequately protected.

Furthermore, the issue of foreign AI models potentially exploiting American technology and content without consent is a valid concern, especially as it ties into broader national security implications. Ensuring that AI innovation does not come at the expense of creators’ rights is essential for maintaining the integrity and economic viability of creative industries. Therefore, implementing policies that prevent the unauthorized use of copyrighted works and hold AI platforms accountable is a necessary step in safeguarding the interests of creators and copyright holders.