As artificial intelligence reshapes the information landscape, library and information professionals face a growing tension between their dual obligations to protect intellectual property and provide broad access to knowledge. This essay examines that tension through the lens of Bartz v. Anthropic (2025), a landmark case in which a federal court ruled that using copyrighted works to train large language models constitutes fair use when those materials were legally obtained while simultaneously finding that materials acquired from shadow libraries do not enjoy the same protection. Drawing on the ethical frameworks of the American Library Association and the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions, this essay argues that AI has not created new ethical dilemmas for the profession so much as it has intensified existing ones, exposing the limits of professional codes written before the age of generative AI. Rather than offering resolution, this essay proposes that the most valuable contribution information professionals can make at this moment is a commitment to open, transparent dialogue and a willingness to ask better questions, even in the absence of clear answers.
The role of libraries and library workers amid rising challenges to intellectual freedom, increasing political polarization, and shifting community expectations is examined. Framed by the belief that “librarianship and library work is a profound act of hope,” it explores how libraries can remain steadfast defenders of equitable information access while fostering dialogue and inclusion. Three central themes are explored: advocacy for access, libraries as inclusive spaces, and preparing for emerging challenges. It highlights the growing prevalence of book challenges and emphasizes the need for strong policies, community partnerships, and empathetic engagement to uphold intellectual freedom. Ultimately, this calls for library workers to act with “courage, compassion, and conviction,” asserting that their daily work shapes the future of libraries as democratic, empowering, and community-centered institutions.
Generative AI represents a fundamentally different kind of technological disruption than those libraries have previously navigated. This commentary argues that librarians are uniquely positioned to be GenAI leaders: not as uncritical champions, nor as reflexive opponents, but as conscientious information professionals trained to ask hard questions about how knowledge is produced, who controls it, and what interests shape it. Drawing on the consistent pattern of society outpacing its capacity to govern new technologies, the article makes an ethical and professional case for library leadership in AI education and engagement. I also warn that inaction carries institutional risk.
