Photo credit: www.cbc.ca
A newly released album titled Is This What We Want? showcases the artistic contributions of over 1,000 musicians while highlighting a profound absence: the sound of silence.
This album, featuring renowned artists such as Kate Bush, Annie Lennox, Cat Stevens, and Damon Albarn, was launched on Tuesday in response to proposed modifications to artificial intelligence law in the United Kingdom. The concerns among artists revolve around potential losses of creative control as a result of these changes.
Globally, creative sectors are currently facing complex legal and ethical dilemmas associated with AI technologies capable of generating content after being trained on existing works, often without compensating the original creators.
The UK government is considering allowing technology companies to utilize copyrighted materials for AI training unless creators specifically choose to opt out. This proposal has stirred significant concern among many artists, raising fears that it could severely impact their ability to safeguard their intellectual property and diminish the strength of the UK’s creative industries. Notable figures such as Elton John and Paul McCartney have publicly voiced their opposition to this initiative.
In a joint letter published in The Times, McCartney, John, and Andrew Lloyd Webber expressed grave worries about the potential implications of these proposals, arguing that the existing copyright framework is a critical factor in why rights holders continue to operate in the UK.
The protest album includes recordings of vacant studios and performance spaces, designed to represent the bleak future that artists fear may unfold if these legal changes take effect. The titles of its 12 tracks collectively convey the message: “The British Government Must Not Legalize Music Theft to Benefit AI Companies.”
Artists argue changes reverse copyright law principles
All proceeds from the album will go to the musicians’ charity Help Musicians.
Ed Newton-Rex, a composer and AI developer who spearheaded the album’s creation, criticized the government’s approach. “The proposal would essentially grant access to the life’s work of the country’s musicians to AI companies, free of charge, enabling these companies to exploit musicians’ contributions to outshine them,” he stated.
Newton-Rex further argued that such a move would not only jeopardize the livelihoods of artists but is also entirely unwarranted. “The UK has the potential to lead in the AI sector without sacrificing our exemplary creative industries,” he asserted.
The Labour Party government in Britain has articulated its ambition to position the UK as a frontrunner in AI technology. In December, the government initiated a consultation aimed at determining how copyright laws could assist creators and rights holders in maintaining control over and securing compensation for the usage of their works in AI training, while simultaneously facilitating easy access for AI developers to a wealth of high-quality creative content. This consultation is set to conclude on Tuesday.
A coalition comprising publishers, artists’ organizations, and media outlets, known as the Creative Rights in AI Coalition, has united to protest any attempts to dilute copyright protections.
On Tuesday, several major UK newspapers featured wraparounds on their front pages, condemning the proposed government consultation with the message: “Let’s protect the creative industries — it’s only fair.”
Source
www.cbc.ca