Creativity experts propose alternative AI legislation to protect author copyright
The UK government's consultation with a view to modifying legislation around copyright protections has now ended. The proposed changes would see artificial intelligence (AI) developers given permission to use artists’ content to help further develop their language learning models (LLMs) unless they ‘opt out’.
Critics argue that the proposal, which launched in December, would give AI companies more muscle to train models using artist’s copyright work without licence. Over one thousand musicians, including Kate Bush and Annie Lennox, have released a silent album with empty studios to protest at the planned reform.
Experts from the Institute for Creativity and AI at City St George’s, University of London, said there were better ways to ensure artists have their copyright protections safeguarded.
Neil Maiden, Professor of Digital Creativity at Bayes Business School, said introducing an ‘opt-out’ for creative work could not only seriously harm UK universities, but other sectors that rely on AI tools for delivering professional services.
“The UK is a world leader in creative arts, and home to so many of the world’s top professional firms in law and medicine – not to mention higher education,” he said.
“Supporting these institutions is vital for the future of the UK and its digital economy.
“These sectors must not be tied to and dominated by expensive US companies if they are to remain ahead. If the government goes ahead with its plans, it is likely that large US platforms would take action to forcibly exclude the latest, less costly open source AI models – such as DeepSeek – because they come from locations that do not respect current intellectual property rules.
University academics, for instance, rely on unfettered access to latest developments without full use of copyright protocols, provided of course there is full attribution of the sources of content. Without this, the quality of our research and teaching could be seriously hampered.
“While UK copyright law is no longer fit for purpose in the digital age, there needs to be a different direction for modification – one which promotes transparency, fair recognition and compensation for the work of creatives, but also safeguards access to their work to aid societal progression.”
Charles Baden-Fuller, Professor of Strategy at Bayes, added that there needed to be more focus on distributors of copyright material, such as social media platforms.
“Trying to force payments from developers of AI located in the UK does not seem the best way forward to redress this balance,” Professor Baden-Fuller said.
“So far, evidence suggests that such payments will be minimal anyway. Forcing payment of legitimate copyright dues at the point of consumption is socially preferred to levying them at the point of production, which suggests the government should redouble its efforts in forcing social media platforms to pay moral and legitimate royalties that are due.
Most of all, being transparent in use of content is crucial for aiding research and rewarding creative activity, since actors generally seek attribution to their efforts even when they provide the outputs for free.
“Moreover, this transparency in use of content will result in an easier case to argue for royalties at the point of consumption.”
All quotes can be attributed to Professor Neil Maiden and Professor Charles Baden-Fuller, Bayes Business School, City St George’s, University of London.
