International

LONDON — The music business is calling on the U.K. government to robustly protect copyright and “safeguard against misuse” by technology companies in any future regulations governing the use of artificial intelligence (AI).
On Tuesday (Dec. 17), the British government launched a 10-week consultation on how copyright protected content, such as music, can lawfully be used by developers to train generative AI models.

The proposals include introducing a new data mining exception to copyright law that would allow AI developers to use copyrighted songs for AI training, including commercial purposes, but only in instances where rights holders have not reserved their rights. Such an opt out mechanism, says the government proposal, gives creators and rights holders the ability to control, licence and monetize the use of their content – or prevent their works being used by AI developers entirely.

The consultation also recommends new transparency requirements for AI developers around what content they have used to train their models and how it was obtained, as well as the labelling of AI-generated material.

Trending on Billboard

Policymakers will additionally seek views from stakeholders on the protection of personality and image rights, and whether the current legal framework provides sufficient protection against AI-generated deepfake imitations.  

“Currently, uncertainty about how copyright law applies to AI is holding back both sectors from reaching their full potential,” said the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) in a statement announcing the consultation. “It can make it difficult for creators to control or seek payment for the use of their work, and creates legal risks for AI firms, stifling AI investment, innovation, and adoption.”

The government said that its proposed changes to copyright law will give clarity to AI developers over what content they are legally allowed to use when training generative AI models and “enhance” creators’ ability to be paid for the use of their work.

Before any new exceptions to copyright law can be introduced, further work would need to take place to ensure transparency standards and the mechanisms for rights holders to reserve their rights are “effective, accessible and widely adopted,” said DCMS.

“This government firmly believes that our musicians, writers, artists and other creatives should have the ability to know and control how their content is used by AI firms and be able to seek licensing deals and fair payment,” said Lisa Nandy, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, in a statement. “Achieving this, and ensuring legal certainty, will help our creative and AI sectors grow and innovate together in partnership.”

The start of the government’s long-awaited consultation on AI policy comes amid heightened lobbying from both the creative and technology industries. On Monday, a coalition of rights holders, including record labels, music publishers and artist groups, came together to call for copyright protection to be at the heart of any U.K. AI legislation.

The newly formed Creative Rights in AI Coalition, whose members include U.K. record labels trade body BPI, umbrella organization UK Music and the Music Publishers Association, wants policymakers to draw up AI laws that permit a “mutually beneficial, dynamic licensing market” built around “robust protections for copyright.”

The creative industries coalition said any future AI legislation must ensure accountability and compliance from AI developers and tech companies, who it said have thus far been exploiting copyright protected works “without permission, ignoring copyright protections and clear reservations of rights.”

The U.K. creative industries generated around £125 billion ($158 billion) for the country’s economy last year, according to government figures, with the music industry contributing a record £7.6 billion, up 13% year-on-year, of that total, according to UK Music research.

The U.K. is the world’s third-biggest recorded music market behind the U.S. and Japan with sales of $1.9 billion in 2023, according to IFPI. It is also the second-largest exporter of recorded music worldwide behind the U.S.

“Without proper control and remuneration for creators, investment in high-quality content will fall,” said the coalition, which also includes the Association of Independent Music (AIM) and British collecting societies PRS for Music and PPL, as well as trade groups representing photographers, illustrators, journalists, authors and filmmakers.

“Just as tech firms are content to pay for the huge quantity of electricity that powers their data centres, they must be content to pay for the high-quality copyright-protected works which are essential to train and ground accurate generative AI models.”

In a separate statement, BPI CEO Jo Twist said the organization was looking forward to working with the government on developing its AI policy but said it remains the BPI’s “firm view” that introducing a new exception to copyright for AI training “would weaken the U.K’s copyright system and offer AI companies permission to take – for their own profit, and without authorisation or compensation – the product of U.K. musicians’ hard work, expertise, and investment.”

“It would amount to a wholly unnecessary subsidy, worth billions of pounds, to overseas tech corporations at the expense of homegrown creators,” said Twist in a statement. She went on to say that opt-out schemes in other markets similar to what is being proposed by the U.K. government have been shown to increase legal uncertainty, “are unworkable in practice, and are woefully ineffective” in protecting creators’ rights.  

The government’s recommendation to introduce a new copyright exception for AI training is an idea that it has floated before – and received strong push back from the music industry to. In 2021, the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) was heavily criticized by artists, labels and publishers for suggesting a new text and data mining (TDM) exception that would have allowed AI developers to freely use copyright-protected works for commercial purposes (albeit with certain restrictions).

Those proposals were quietly shelved by the government the following year but progress on any U.K. legislation governing the use of AI has been slow to arrive. In contrast, the 27-member block European Union, which the United Kingdom officially left in 2020, passed its world-first Artificial Intelligence Act – requiring transparency and accountability from AI developers – in March.

Meanwhile, other major music markets, including the United States, Japan and China are advancing their own attempts to regulate the nascent technology amid loud opposition from creators and rights holders over the unauthorized use of their work to train generative AI systems.

Earlier this year, the three major record companies – Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group — filed lawsuits against AI music firms Suno and Udio alleging the widespread infringement of copyrighted sound recordings “at an almost unimaginable scale” Sony Music and Warner Music have additionally issued public notices to AI companies warning them against scraping their copyrighted data.

More recently, in October, thousands of musicians, composers, actors and authors from across the creative industries – as well as all three major record labels – signed a statement opposing the unlicensed use of creative works for training generative AI. The number of signatories has since risen to more than 37,000 people, including ABBA’s Björn Ulvaeus, all five members of Radiohead and The Cure’s Robert Smith.