Join free with your email
Free. No spam, ever — we'll never share your email address and you can opt out at any time. Already a subscriber? Log in
Researcher with public evidence across AI research.
@afedercooper.bsky.social and I have a new paper working through the surprisingly tricky problem of whether storing model weights that might or might not generate copyrighted output when prompted makes the model a "copy" under copyright law papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
My latest paper discusses new tools @afedercooper.bsky.social and I, with others, are using to identify not just verbatim memorization in AI models but text that is extractable with only minor changes. We find significantly more memorization once we include non-exact copies. a…
More here: arxiv.org/abs/2601.02671
5. Talkin' 'Bout AI Generation: Copyright and the Generative-AI Supply Chain. With @katherinelee.bsky.social and @jtlg.bsky.social. J. Copyright Soc'y. arxiv.org/abs/2309.08133
4. Probabilistic "Copies" in Generative AI Models. With @marklemley.bsky.social. Forthcoming, Berkeley Tech. Law J. arxiv.org/abs/2607.14532
2. Scalable Extraction of Training Data from (Production) Language Models. With Milad Nasr, Nicholas Carlini, Katherine Lee, and others. arxiv.org/abs/2311.17035
Our large-scale study of memorization of books in open-weight LLMs (e.g., Llama, Qwen) will appear at the 2026 Conference on Language Modeling as an oral. We made a website for exploring our results on 200 books and 14 models: books-memorization.github.io
I think this is a really important read. @masnick.com carefully explains what is so shocking about recent revelations in court about undisclosed COIs concerning research on copyright and LLMs. www.techdirt.com/2026/09/25/o...
Prospective copyright plaintiffs have started asking me my opinion about citing "Alignment Whack-a-Mole" in litigation. It reports that fine-tuning makes frontier LLMs reproduce up to 85-90% of copyrighted books. I don't think the headline results hold up: afedercooper.info/wh…
For more, please check out our work, cited in the decision above: 1. The Files are in the Computer: On Copyright, Memorization, and Generative AI. With @jtlg.bsky.social. Chi.-Kent Law Rev. scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/...
A colleague sent along the decision in GEMA v. Suno, which I got to reading today: media.licdn.com/dms/document... I have my own thoughts on aspects of the decision, but regardless of the details, it continues to blow my mind that papers from my PhD and postdoc get cited in li…
in our new preprint (with @marklemley.bsky.social and others), we revisit what it means to run valid extraction experiments from first principles. i recently gave a talk on this work at ICML, and we'll be wrapping up the preprint soon monkey-emeritus.github.io
is anyone else finding Opus 5 to be an utter disaster? I've seen some other people complaining about taking actions that don't make sense without approval. I don't use AI that way (yet); I iterate slowly/ co-work through what I'm working on. And Opus 5 just can't do that.
Like many of my colleagues, I'm receiving dozens of EOI emails a day from prospective students. It's worth reading those emails before clicking send. (I expect most are using AI to draft emails. This tiny prompt injection is just to see if the sender bothered to even read the output.)
Center = A. Feder Cooper. Left = members they follow (green edges). Right = members who follow them (blue edges). Top = mutual follows (orange edges, slightly larger). Drag any node to reposition; click to open that profile.
Add the Who’s Who of AI badge to your site or bio. It links back to this profile.
Markdown: [](https://aiweekly.co/whos-who/person/afedercooper-bsky-social)