eWEEK content and product recommendations are editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links to our partners. Learn More.
Sir Paul McCartney has strongly opposed suggested alterations to the U.K.’s copyright law, cautioning that they might facilitate “rip-off” technology that threatens the livelihoods of artists and musicians. In a rare interview on BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, McCartney expressed his disapproval of permitting AI developers to use creators’ online content to train their models, unless rights holders explicitly choose to opt out. The iconic musician and one of the last two members of The Beatles called on the government to reevaluate, highlighting the possible detrimental effects on artists and writers.
“We found a job that we loved,” McCartney said, “but it also paid the bills.” He cautioned that removing protections could disincentivize creativity and lead to a “loss of creativity.”
Worries About the “Wild West” of AI and Copyright
The suggested modifications intend to provide AI developers enhanced access to online resources for text and data mining, a method through which generative AI systems acquire knowledge from extensive datasets to generate new content. The government intends to provide creators with a “rights reservation” choice to exclude their content from being used in AI training.
Nevertheless, detractors claim this system imposes an unreasonable responsibility on individual creators to track and safeguard their work online. McCartney cautioned that the suggestions could lead to a “Wild West” scenario where copyright laws are ignored.
“You have young men and women emerging who create a beautiful song, yet they don’t possess it,” he said. “Anyone who desires can simply tear it off.”
Music Industry Raises Concern
The music industry has aligned with McCartney in denouncing the proposals, as U.K. Music chief executive Tom Kiehl labeled them a “reckless gamble against the creative industry.” He observed that the music industry adds more than $120 billion annually to the economy, and loosening copyright protections could jeopardize this success.
Kiehl also criticized the opt-out approach, stating that it offers little reassurance to creators.
“There is no evidence that creatives can effectively ‘opt-out’ of their work being trained by AI systems,” he said, adding that an opt-in system would provide a more equitable solution. This alternative will be debated in the House of Lords by crossbench peer Baroness Kidron.
“AI can do lots of great things,” McCartney said, acknowledging AI’s potential and citing its role in creating the song Now and Then. “We took an old cassette of John’s and cleaned his voice up so it sounded like it had just been recorded yesterday. So it has its uses. But it shouldn’t rip creative people off.”
Learn more about how AI can be used for voice generation and the range of applications that opens up.