The UK government’s newish Technology Secretary Liz Kendall has indicated she understands and is sympathetic to concerns expressed by the creative industries - including the music industry - regarding the government’s past approach to the copyright issues around AI.
Kendall says that she and Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy are now “resetting the discussion”, after ministers were criticised earlier this year for seeming to support a new copyright exception that would benefit AI companies before even consulting the creative industries on the matter.
And for blocking efforts by film-maker Beeban Kidron, as a member of the House Of Lords, to introduce clear copyright and transparency obligations for AI companies as part of new data legislation.
According to The Guardian, Kendall - who took over from Peter Kyle in the Technology Secretary role as part of the big government reshuffle in September - now says that people in the creative industries “rightly want to get paid for the work that they do”, but that we “have to find a way” that will allow both the creative and AI sectors to “grow and thrive in the future”.
Many in the creative industries criticised Kyle for being too close to big tech as it lobbied hard for a more flexible copyright regime that would make it easier for AI companies to make use of existing content when training generative AI models, without getting explicit permission from - and paying any royalties to - the creators and rights owners that created and own that content
Although some saw Kendall’s appointment in September as an opportunity for the creative industries in the AI debate, she did then appoint a special advisor who had previously said “whether or not you philosophically believe the big AI firms should compensate content creators, they in practice will never legally have to”.
Seeking to reassure the creative industries that that doesn’t mean she’s even more on the side of big tech than her predecessor, Kendall now says “views before you come to work for the government are not the views of the government”.
Kidron has welcomed Kendall’s latest statements on copyright and AI, but says the government “lost the trust of the entire creative community” for failing to tackle the big AI copyright issues earlier this year.
And there’s things Kendall could be doing right now to make a difference, Kidron adds, such as refusing to sign deals for public sector AI projects with tech companies that won’t commit to basic copyright and transparency obligations.
For her part, Kendall says she understands why “many creatives are urging us to act immediately because so much has happened already”.
But, she adds “we’ve got to get this right” and “there’s a lot of detail to work out here”. Hence no immediate dramatic actions on Kendall’s part, and instead this commitment to simply “reset the discussion”.
That seems to mean, in part at least, convening yet more roundtables of experts to discuss the various issues around copyright, licensing and other creator rights in the context of AI, to supplement the copyright and AI consultation that the government undertook at the start of the year.
We are expecting some sort of response to that consultation this side of Christmas, but with the new roundtables to also factor in, more detailed proposals are not now expected until next year.
Both Kendall and Nandy seem optimistic that a compromise position can still be found that satisfies both the creative and AI sectors. Or at least, that remains their desired outcome, with Kendall stating, “I believe it is possible to find a way forward that delivers for both because we don’t want to have to choose”.
The previous Conservative government also convened an assortment of roundtables in a bid to find a compromise position, without success.
The creative industries are adamant that AI companies making use of existing content must come to the negotiating table and agree licensing deals with the relevant creators and rights owners, which will likely involve both upfront fees and long-term revenue share arrangements. AI companies believe they should be able to make use of existing content without asking for anyone’s permission first.
In the US, where there is even more legal uncertainty on these issues, the two sides remain equally opposed, at least officially speaking. And both sides hope that litigation and lobbying will go in their favour regarding the copyright obligations of AI businesses.
That said, that legal uncertainty has the potential - under US law - to result in AI companies having to pay future damages in the region of a trillion dollars. Which means some AI start-ups, which need to raise investment and fear that risk could put off investors, are now voluntarily coming to the negotiating table. Hence the major labels starting to announce a series of big deals with AI companies.
It may be that UK ministers are monitoring those developments in the US and secretly hope that - as those AI licensing deals start to be announced - at least some of the big copyright dramas around AI will go away and they won't be forced to publicly pick a side. Even if some disputes around licensing, transparency and creator rights remain. We shall see.