In a wide ranging 15-minute speech, US IP tsar Espinel said the cloud "may have the effect of reducing piracy by giving value to consumers - the ability to own forever and access almost anywhere - that cannot be obtained with illegal copies".
Cloud computing is the term used to refer to the ability to access information through a remote bank of servers rather than from a local computer. Information stored in the cloud can be accessed from the nearest bank of servers, which reduces the bandwidth used.
As an example of a service that is designed for "consumer desires and expectations that are shaped by the internet and shaped cloud computing", Espinel highlighted UltraViolet - a projected developed by a number of technology companies in association with the main film studios as a cloud-based locker system that will enable consumers to buy a work for ever and access it from any device.
But she also admitted that the cloud brings its own copyright problems. "The cloud may intensify what are already variations of issues that arose years ago with the advent of the internet."
"It may also accelerate the pace at which we need to address those issues," she added.
Espinel said that questions have been raised about the legality of the cloud music services launched by Amazon, Google and, most recently, Apple, which launched iCloud on Monday.
"We hope that these questions are resolved very soon" she added.
But other participants at the World Copyright Summit, which took place on Tuesday and Wednesday this week and was organised by the International Confederation of Authors and Composers Societies (CISAC), focused more on the licensing issues that these new services have thrown up.
"When I heard Steve Jobs present the iCloud I wanted to sing some Mick Jagger - 'Get off of my cloud'," said Eduardo Bautista, president of management board of SGAE, the main collecting society for songwriters, composers and music publishers in Spain.
All three cloud music services raise copyright questions. Amazon and Google both launched their services without any extra licences.
Apple did reach agreement with the major record labels, but offers US customers a service in which, for an extra $25 a year, songs not purchased using the iTunes digital store can be matched with Apple's catalogue and spread among different devices.
Although the service is designed to allow music that was bought on a CD and then moved to a computer to be part of the service, people attending the summit pointed out that illegally downloaded material could also qualify for it.
And poor quality illegally downloaded music would then be replaced by higher quality music from Apple's cloud servers, providing an "amnesty for pirates".
"When the services were first announced I was enthusiastic. That enthusiasm was crushed," said John Lafrumento CEO of the American Society of Composers, Authors & Publishers. He insisted that all three services need to be licensed. "This means we have another fight on our hands," he added.
Lafrumento was speaking during a session on day two on the cloud that was moderated by Jeremy Silver of Mediaclarity UK.
Robert Ashcroft, chief executive of PRS for Music in the UK, differentiated between services that were an entirely passive way for consumers to store their music, which may not need new licences, and services that offered music functionality, such as playlists, and did need to be licensed.
He said that it was important for this to be done fairly: "We do not want to license things that are a fig leaf to an open door to theft."
Anthony Bebawi, director of legal and business affairs for EMI Music Publishing, said that the cloud was part of an evolution from physical products, to downloading to an access model - in effect a bridge between ownership and subscription: "It's about getting consumers into the habit of not owning things."
