Two years after the European Parliament passed the Artificial Intelligence Act, MEPs this week finally adopted a report on copyright and generative AI.
On Tuesday, March 10, Parliament passed its resolution on “Copyright and generative artificial intelligence – opportunities and challenges” with an overwhelming majority of 460 votes to 71, and with 88 abstentions.
The report calls for the EU and its 27 member states to focus on the crucial issues of how AI and tech companies engage with copyright-protected music in the digital age, and explores a licensing system as a solution, paving the way for fair compensation for the use of creative works.
The European Parliament’s vote, led by rapporteur Axel Voss (EPP, Germany), is a stride in the right direction, say music industry reps. But there’s considerable work to be done.
“As the European Commission is currently assessing the EU copyright framework, the Parliament has clearly recognized the need for action to ensure fairness, transparency and appropriate remuneration for creators in the generative AI market,” said Adriana Moscoso del Prado, GM of GESAC, the European group of societies of authors and composers. “This political report also stresses the importance of safeguarding the integrity of the European legal system, which must apply equally to all services operating in the EU, while ensuring a level playing field for Europe’s innovative businesses.”
This vote, notes Moscoso del Prado, adds to the growing recognition at EU level of what is at stake: innovation, fairness and cultural sovereignty must go hand in hand.”
The European Composer and Songwriter Alliance (ECSA) also welcomes the outcome as one that addresses the organization’s repeated calls for a high-level debate on the interplay between copyright and generative AI.
Next up, remarks Helienne Lindvall, songwriter and ECSA president, the European Commission must turn words into action.
“Today’s adoption of this resolution by the European Parliament marks an important step towards ensuring consent, transparency, and remuneration of rightsholders in the context of AI, answering our calls for a long-overdue democratic debate on these issues,” notes Lindvall.
“We now urge the European Commission to duly take into account these crucial recommendations by proposing an additional legal framework to safeguard authors’ rights in the age of AI.”
IMPALA’s executive chair Helen Smith echoes those comments. “Whilst we do not agree with all the recommendations in the report, we fully agree exclusive rights are key,” Smith explains. “We also welcome the parliament’s emphasis on the importance of voluntary licensing. As far as our members, European independent music companies, are concerned, voluntary licensing – whether individual or collective – based on exclusive rights and contractual freedom to decide whether to authorize is key to build a licensing market for the use of copyright-protected music by GenAI models.”
The trade body, which represents more than 6,000 independent music companies across Europe, is calling on the European Parliament and European Commission to focus on implementation of the current copyright regime “rather than look to open it up.”
AI isn’t a buzz word in Europe. It’s seen as both a gift and a threat to a creative sector which generates an estimated 6.9% of the EU’s GDP.
“We need clear rules for the use of copyright-protected content for AI training,” rapporteur Voss said after the vote. “Legal certainty would let AI developers know which content can be used and how licences can be obtained. On the other hand, rightsholders would be protected against unauthorized use of their content and receive remuneration. If we want to promote and develop AI in Europe while also protecting our creators, then these provisions are absolutely indispensable.”
Read more here.
