Kang Zhang

Generative AI systems using GANs and diffusion models are reshaping artistic practice and policy. This article focuses on the United States and asks: How do recent federal and state policy instruments governing generative AI in artistic expression align with public discourse in mainstream news and Reddit between July 2024 and June 2025? We synthesize U.S. developments on authorship, fair use/transformative use, personality rights, and deepfakes, incorporate new case law and U.S. Copyright Office reports, and offer a compact comparative note on the EU AI Act. Using TF-IDF keywording and VADER sentiment on 287 news items and 3921 Reddit posts, we map convergences (broad support for provenance/labeling; concern for image/voice cloning) and divergences (co-authorship and training-data compensation). We argue that narrowly tailored provenance requirements and clearer standards for AI-assisted authorship would reduce uncertainty without chilling legitimate artistic practice. Limitations, include English-language scope, platform bias, and the use of bag-of-words semantics. Our findings motivate policy designs that reconcile legal safeguards with creative experimentation.

In the extensive literature on science policy, there is little discussion of engineering policy. Yet in many instances the science in science policy discourse is really engineering, and engineering is often as important for public policy formation and implementation as science. Science policy discourse commonly distinguishes between “science for policy” and “policy for science,” a distinction that can also be used to examine engineering policy. Engineering for policy includes both engineering advice to policy makers, such as where to construct a dam or what standards should be established to achieve a certain level of safety, and actual engineering to achieve policy goals, such as designing, constructing, and operating an electric power grid or public transport system. Policy for engineering focuses on such questions as how much to fund engineering education or to promote ethics in engineering. Reflection is extended by considering engineering policy related ideas in the work of engineer Henry Petroski and policy scholar Roger Pielke Jr., both of whom address issues in the American context. An appendix makes brief reference to engineering policy in the Chinese context.