EU's AI Act falls short in providing adequate protection for copyrights of artists, according to creative organizations
The European Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) is set to come into force, marking a significant step towards regulating the use of AI in the continent. However, the Act has sparked a debate among creative industry groups who argue that it has loopholes that need to be addressed for them to thrive in a creative world dominated by AI.
The AI Act primarily protects copyright by mandating transparent, lawful copyright policies. AI providers are required to implement and maintain such policies that comply with EU copyright laws and respect copyright owners' rights, including any reservations made by them. Providers must ensure only lawfully accessible copyrighted content is reproduced or extracted for AI training, avoiding circumventing technological protection measures and excluding websites known for persistently infringing copyrights.
However, it remains unclear how creators can effectively opt out of such use, and many artistic and creative groups argue that the Act does not adequately protect their copyrights when their works are used without permission in training datasets. Legal clarity on whether AI training on copyrighted content constitutes infringement or qualifies as lawful use under copyright exceptions is still evolving across jurisdictions.
Adriana Moscono, GESAC's general manager, has reported that attempts to opt out by sending letters and emails to individual AI companies for a license have been unsuccessful. The advocates are suggesting that the Commission could mandate AI companies to negotiate blanket or collective licenses with respective artist groups.
The deadline for new AI companies to comply with the AI Act's regulations is 2026, while companies already operating in the EU have until 2027 to comply. The Commission and the European Court of Justice are planning to review the text and data mining exemption in the copyright legislation issued in 2019.
The debate around copyright protection in the AI Act is far from over. The verdict of ongoing copyright lawsuits against AI companies, such as GEMA's lawsuit against OpenAI and Suno AI, could determine to what extent AI companies could be bound to copyright laws.
The EU's AI Code of Practice on General-Purpose (GPAI) asks providers to commit to a copyright policy, put in place safeguards to avoid any infringements of rights, and designate a place to receive and process complaints. Major tech and AI companies such as Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI have become signatories to this code.
As the AI Act comes into force, it is crucial for the European Commission to urgently clarify the rules around opting out and copyright protection. Without a clear way to opt out or get paid when tech companies use their music, books, movies, and other art to train their AI models, experts say that their work is continually at risk.
Artificial intelligence companies should be mandated to negotiate blanket or collective licenses with respective artistic and creative groups, as it remains unclear how creators can effectively opt out of AI use that incorporates their copyrighted works without permission. The ambiguity around whether AI training on copyrighted content constitutes infringement or lawful use under copyright exceptions necessitates urgent clarification from the European Commission.
