The US Copyright Office is facing an unusually high-stakes leadership dispute at the same time copyright law is being tested by the AI boom. With dozens of potentially economy-shaking AI copyright lawsuits moving through the courts, the office that handles core copyright functions has been operating without a clear active leader for more than a month.
The immediate issue is personnel. The broader issue is authority: who can remove the Register of Copyrights, who can appoint a replacement, and whether everyday copyright work can continue without creating new legal vulnerabilities.
A leadership fight at a critical moment
In May, Copyright Register Shira Perlmutter was abruptly fired by email by the White House’s deputy director of personnel. Perlmutter is now suing the Trump administration, arguing that her firing was invalid. The government maintains that the executive branch has the authority to dismiss her.
The Copyright Office is part of the Library of Congress. Perlmutter had been appointed by Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden, who had been in her role since 2016. A few days before Perlmutter was dismissed, Hayden was also fired by the White House via email.
The White House then appointed Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who had previously served as President Trump’s defense attorney, as the new acting Librarian of Congress. That appointment sits at the center of the dispute because Perlmutter argues that only the Librarian of Congress can fire and appoint a new Register.
In a filing on Tuesday, defendants argued that the president does have the authority to fire and appoint the Librarian of Congress, and that the president’s appointees can then choose a new Copyright Register. Neither the Department of Justice nor the White House responded to requests for comment on the issue, and the Library of Congress declined to comment.
Competing claims over who is in charge
Two days after Perlmutter’s firing, Justice Department official Paul Perkins arrived at the Copyright Office with colleague Brian Nieves. According to an affidavit from Perlmutter, they carried “printed versions of emails” from Blanche saying they had been appointed to new roles within the Copyright Office.
The email designated Perkins as Acting Register of Copyrights, making him Perlmutter’s intended replacement. But the question was whether Blanche was actually the acting Librarian and therefore able to make that appointment.
Inside the Library of Congress, another person had already taken on the acting role: Robert Newlen, Hayden’s former second-in-command, who has worked at the LOC since the 1970s. After Hayden’s ouster, Newlen emailed LOC staff saying he was the acting Librarian and noting that “Congress is engaged with the White House” on how to proceed.
Perkins and Nieves did not enter the USCO office or assume the roles they purported to fill on the day they appeared. Sources within the Library of Congress told WIRED that they have not returned and have not taken up the duties tied to those roles.
A congressional aide familiar with the situation told WIRED that Blanche, Perkins, and Nieves had not shown up for work “because they don’t have jobs to show up to.” The aide added: “As we’ve always maintained, the President has no authority to appoint them. Robert Newlen has always been the Acting Librarian of Congress.”
Why registration certificates are drawing scrutiny
The Copyright Office has tried to continue operating, but the absence of an active Register has already affected copyright registration. Immediately after Perlmutter’s dismissal, the office paused issuing registration certificates “out of an abundance of caution,” according to USCO spokesperson Lisa Berardi Marflak.
Berardi Marflak said the pause affected around 20,000 registrations. The office resumed activities on May 29, but registration certificates are now being sent with a blank space where Perlmutter’s signature would normally appear.
That change has prompted discussion among copyright experts about whether the registrations may be more vulnerable to legal challenges. The Copyright Office says the certificates are valid. Berardi Marflak said, “There is no requirement that the Register’s signature must appear on registration certificates.”
Perlmutter’s position is different. In a motion related to her lawsuit, she alleges that sending registrations without a signature opens them up to “challenges in litigation.”
IP lawyer Rachael Dickson drew a distinction between a signature requirement and the Register’s statutory role. “It’s true the law doesn’t explicitly require a signature,” Dickson said. “However, the law really explicitly says that it’s the Register of Copyright determining whether the material submitted for the application is copyrightable subject matter.”
Dickson said that if no one is acting as Register, it would be reasonable to argue that statutory requirements are not being met. “If you take them completely out of the equation, you have a really big problem,” she said. “Litigators who are trying to challenge a copyright registration’s validity will jump on this.”
Operational risks beyond certificates
The registration issue is only one part of the concern. Perlmutter’s lawyers argue that an office without an active boss can face dysfunction because the Register performs a range of duties, including advising Congress on copyright.
One example is the Mechanical Licensing Collective, the nonprofit that administers royalties for streaming and download music in the United States. The MLC’s certification is up right now, and Perlmutter would ordinarily be moving forward with recertifying the organization. Her lawsuit says the recertification process is not moving forward.
A source close to the MLC told WIRED that the organization does need to be recertified, but that the law does not require the recertification process to be completed within a specific time frame. According to that source, the MLC will be able to continue operating as usual.
Another pressure point is the Copyright Claims Board, a three-person tribunal that resolves some copyright disputes. One current board member is leaving this year, and the job posting is already live and says applications are being reviewed.
The uncertainty is that the position is supposed to be appointed by the Librarian of Congress with the guidance of the Copyright Register. A source familiar at the Library of Congress told WIRED that Newlen could make the appointment if necessary, but they “expect there to be some kind of greater resolution by then.”
The unresolved question
The Copyright Office’s current problem is not simply that a senior official was removed. It is that multiple actors are asserting different views of who has authority over one of the country’s central copyright institutions.
Senator Alex Padilla has sided with Perlmutter. “The president has no authority to remove the Register of Copyrights. That power lies solely with the Librarian of Congress. I’m relieved that the situation at the Library and Copyright Office has stabilized following the administration’s unconstitutional attempt to seize control for the executive branch. I look forward to quickly resolving this matter in a bipartisan way,” he told WIRED.
For now, the Copyright Office continues to process work while the dispute plays out. But the core uncertainty remains: if no clearly recognized Register is actively leading the office, then even routine copyright administration can become a target for legal challenge.