‘Ensure creators are paid or legislate on AI’ MPs tell UK government
Report highlights the concerns over creatives' incomes, royalty rates, and ‘gaps’ in the UK copyright regime | ‘Smart Fund’ proposal would see tech firms pay small fee from device sales | MPs stress need for enforceable mechanisms of remuneration and new copyright rules if necessary | Lack of a private copying scheme is ‘preventing’ creators from receiving payments from the UK and abroad.
Members of Parliament (MP) have urged the UK government to take action to protect the livelihoods of creative individuals from AI and an “outdated” copyright framework.
In a report published by the Commons Culture, Media, and Sports Committee, MPs highlighted the financial difficulties that accomplished musicians, actors, and writers are facing due to artificial intelligence (AI), streaming platforms, and shortfalls in copyright law.
The committee's report, published today, April 10, sheds light on issues surrounding fair remuneration and working conditions across the creative industries, and said it had unearthed concerning trends impacting creators' livelihoods.
The report follows an inquiry launched by the committee to explore issues around fair remuneration and working conditions across the creative industries and consider possible solutions.
MPs said they are “disappointed” that the government’s working group on AI and IP failed to come to an agreement between the creative industries and AI developers on creators’ consent and compensation regarding the use of their works to train AI.
“We call on the government to ensure that creators have proper mechanisms to enforce their consent and receive fair compensation when their works are used by AI systems,” said the report.
The government should “set out measurable objectives for the period of engagement with the AI and rights holders sectors” it continued, and provide a “definitive deadline at which it will step in with legislation in order to break any deadlock”.
Chief executives from royalties and creative sector organisations ALCS, BECS, DACS, Directors UK and PICSEL called on all political parties to “commit to adopting the recommendations laid out in this report in their general election manifesto.”
Status quo ‘favours’ AI developers
Despite previous discussions on the subject, the inquiry noted a lack of consensus between the creative sector and AI developers regarding creators' consent and compensation for the use of their works to train AI systems.
MPs were “concerned that the status quo simply favours AI developers”.
Creative industries and media groups have voiced concerns that AI developers are using their works without authorisation.
These developers have not been seeking licence agreements, or have not provided fair compensation, however, are claiming that the works used do not infringe copyright.
Meanwhile, AI developers have been vocal in demanding a more permissive copyright regime.
For example, OpenAI in January 2024, told the House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee that “it would be impossible to train today’s leading AI models without using copyrighted materials” because it covers “virtually every sort of human expression”.
The committee previously recommended the government “win back the trust of creators” regarding their concerns over AI. However, its working group has not been able to decide a code of practice for AI and IP.
Now, the committee has called on the government to “ensure that creators have proper mechanisms to enforce their consent and receive fair compensation for use of their work by AI developers”.
‘Gaps’ in UK copyright regime
Another key area of concern highlighted in the report related to the decline in royalties and residuals experienced by creators across various sectors of the industry.
Royalties can provide financial certainty, greater career flexibility and support during retirement for those who receive them, explained the report.
The decline reflects how the “copyright framework has become outdated”, said MPs.
These royalties have been “depressed” by digital distribution in the UK, which pays out less to creators (if at all) compared to other modes of distribution.
The report also highlighted “gaps” in the UK copyright regime, particularly concerning private copying.
The lack of compensation for private copying activities, such as downloading and sharing content on digital devices, threatens payments from abroad due to a lack of reciprocity with other jurisdictions.
A joint statement from the chief executives from ALCS, BECS, DACS, Directors UK and PICSEL said: “The way we experience culture is constantly changing. Together, we are campaigning for a statutory mechanism that protects the rights of creators and performers, when their works are enjoyed, shared, and distributed, including across digital devices.”
To address these issues, the report recommended the implementation of a private copying scheme by the government.
This scheme would aim to protect payments from abroad and establish a sustainable income stream for creators affected by digital distribution practices.
A ‘Smart Fund’ was proposed, into which technology manufacturers would pay a small portion of device sales, which would then be distributed to creators and community projects focusing on digital creativity and skills development.
The chief executives from ALCS, BECS, DACS, Directors UK and PICSEL thought the Smart Fund represented a “pivotal opportunity” to offer creators a sustainable income stream.
MPs called for a “complete reset” to address fundamental, structural problems within the recorded music industry and streaming economy.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox
