A consultation in the UK has launched today on plans to “give certainty to the creative industries and AI developers” on how copyright material can be used to train AI models.
Supporting the UK government’s Plan For Change, the move aims to help drive growth across both sectors by ensuring protection and payment for rights-holders and supporting AI developers to innovate responsibly.
“Both sectors are central to the government’s Industrial Strategy, and these proposals aim to forge a new path forward which will allow both to flourish and drive growth,” said a statement from DCMS along with the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, and the Intellectual Property Office.
Key areas of the 10-week consultation include boosting trust and transparency between the sectors, so rights-holders have a better understanding of how AI developers are using their material and how it has been obtained.
The consultation also explores how creators can license and be remunerated for the use of their material, and how wide access to high-quality data for AI developers can be strengthened to enable innovation across the UK AI sector.
The proposals will help “unlock the full potential of the AI sector and creative industries to drive innovation, investment, and prosperity across the country”, according to the announcement.
This latest move follows previous unsuccessful attempts to agree a voluntary AI copyright code of practice.
The consultation proposes introducing an exception to copyright law for AI training for commercial purposes while allowing rights-holders to reserve their rights, so they can control the use of their content.
In response (see below), BPI CEO Dr Jo Twist OBE said that any “exception to copyright law for AI training with rights reservation would be hugely damaging to our national interest”.
Today’s announcement by the UK government coincides with Merlin, the independent sector’s digital licensing agency, issuing a statement to clarify that it will not allow the use of AI training on its repertoire without permission.
“It has been suggested that training of AI models on artists’ work without permission should somehow be considered ‘fair use’,” said Merlin in a statement. “We believe it is the exact opposite of fair, both morally and legally.”
Before any UK measures on AI training could come into effect, further work with both sectors would be needed to ensure any standards and requirements for rights reservation and transparency are effective and widely adopted.
“These measures would be fundamental to the effectiveness of any exception, and we would not introduce an exception without them,” said the statement.
The consultation also proposes new requirements for AI model developers to be more transparent about their model training datasets and how they are obtained. For example, AI developers could be required to provide more information about what content they have used to train their models.
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
Lisa Nandy
Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Peter Kyle, said: “The UK has an incredibly rich and diverse cultural sector and a groundbreaking tech sector which is pushing the boundaries of AI. It’s clear that our current AI and copyright framework does not support either our creative industries or our AI sectors to compete on the global stage.
“That is why we are setting out a balanced package of proposals to address uncertainty about how copyright law applies to AI so we can drive continued growth in the AI sector and creative industries, which will help deliver on our mission of the highest sustained growth in the G7 as part of our Plan For Change.
“This is all about partnership: balancing strong protections for creators while removing barriers to AI innovation; and working together across government and industry sectors to deliver this.”
Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Lisa Nandy, said: “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. Achieving this, and ensuring legal certainty, will help our creative and AI sectors grow and innovate together in partnership.
“We stand steadfast behind our world-class creative and media industries which add so much to our cultural and economic life. We will work with them and the AI sector to develop this clearer copyright system for the digital age and ensure that any system is workable and easy-to-use for businesses of all sizes.”
According to the joint announcement, these proposals lay the groundwork for rights-holders to strike licensing deals with AI developers when rights have been reserved.
The government welcomes licensing deals that have already been agreed, including by major firms in the music and news publishing sectors.
But it noted that “many more creatives and right holders have not been able to do so under the current copyright regime”.
“The creative industries, and businesses of all sizes, need more help to control their content and strike licensing deals, and we are determined to help them do this,” adds the statement.
The consultation also recognises issues related to the protection of personality rights in the context of digital replicas, such as deepfake imitations of individuals, and will seek views on whether the current legal frameworks are sufficiently robust to tackle the issue.
MUSIC INDUSTRY REACTION
Dr Jo Twist OBE, BPI CEO
“We look forward to engaging with the detail of the government’s proposals, and welcome elements to improve transparency, record-keeping and the objective of developing licensing models, but it remains our firm view that an exception to copyright law for AI training with rights reservation would be hugely damaging to our national interest. The music industry has long embraced the opportunity of AI and supports a strong market for licensing. However, we remain to be convinced that a copyright exception would move the AI and creative industries closer to agreeing a functioning licensing model; in fact, we believe it would further disincentivise tech companies from doing so.
“Strong copyright is the basis of growth. It enables creative and AI sectors to flourish. A copyright exception would weaken the UK’s copyright system and offer AI companies permission to take – for their own profit, and without authorisation or compensation – the product of UK 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.
“Other markets have shown that opt-out schemes introduce more legal uncertainty, are unworkable in practice, and are woefully ineffective in protecting creative work from misuse and theft.”
Council Of Music Makers (incorporating the Ivors Academy, FAC, MMF, MPG and Musicians' Union)
“This consultation provides a unique moment for the government to protect individual creators' rights and facilitate a dynamic licensing market for the use of music and other creative works in building generative AI. This is the only way that the creative industries and AI sector will both flourish and grow.
“The Council Of Music Makers recognises that AI presents new opportunities for the music business, but for these to be realised, the consent and remuneration of music-makers is key.
“Explicit consent must always be secured from music-makers, by either rights-holders or technology companies, before their music, lyrics, likeness or voice is used and exploited by AI models. And when licensing deals are done between the music industry and AI companies, all music-makers must be fairly remunerated for their contributions, without which this technology would not be possible.
“The CMM stands by the five fundamentals on AI it published more than a year ago. Music-makers now look forward to working with their business partners in the music industry, their fellow creators in other artforms, responsible technology companies and the government to ensure the UK’s gold-standard, robust copyright framework continues. A framework that enables innovation and powers growth in a way that protects and champions the human creators behind the UK creative industries that generate over £100 billion annually.”
FOLLOW 
