Cambridge Society of Authors tell city’s MP the government has AI and copyright plan ‘the wrong way around’

Cambridge’s MP has expressed his support for an exception to copyright rules that would give technology companies the right to mine creative work to train their artificial intelligence models.

The government has caused alarm among writers, musicians, artists and journalists with its proposals to introduce the data mining exception.

Cambridge members of the Society of Authors wrote to Daniel Zeichner, the city’s Labour MP, to voice their fears, as the Cambridge Independent reported last month.

The 28 members warned him: “This exception will undermine long-established intellectual property rights to the benefit of generative AI companies.”

They told him this kind of AI “depends on pirating, plagiarising and exploiting the work of human creators by ‘scraping’ creative works protected by copyright, such as music, images, videos, and literary works including books and news articles, from the internet without permission or payment”.

When announcing its consultation on the plans, which closed on 25 February, the government said the current uncertainty surrounding copyright was “undermining investment in and adoption of AI technology” so it was proposing a data mining exception while give rights holders the chance to opt out to “reserve their rights and thereby prevent their content being used for AI training”.

Mr Zeichner, a government minister, supported this position in his response to the Cambridge Society of Authors.

He told them: “I support right holders to exercise control over the use of their content in the training of AI models and their ability to be remunerated for their work. Writers, musicians, artists and other creatives should have the ability to know and control the use of their content, as well as the ability to seek licensing deals and fair payment.

“The application of UK copyright law to the training of AI models is currently disputed and these are the challenges right holders face today. Right holders are often unable in practice to control how copyright in their work is used or to gain remuneration for their works, this is often particularly true for new or solo artists. This situation is hampering innovation and growth in both our creative and AI sectors.”

He added: “The government’s proposals include a mechanism for rights holders to reserve their rights, allowing creators to license and be remunerated for the use of their work in AI training. Under this proposal, right holders can expressly reserve their rights and AI developers are only allowed to train on materials in which right holders did not reserve their rights. This approach of a data mining exception allows right holders to reserve their rights underpinned by transparency and removes legal ambiguity.”

And he told them: “The government recognises that for rights reservation and measures on transparency to work in practice, there will need to be appropriate support to encourage widespread adoption and compliance. The government is keen to ensure that rights holders understand how and where their content is used, while also ensuring any measures are not disproportionate for small businesses and individuals.”

But Amy Gray, from the Cambridge Society of Authors, told the Cambridge Independent: “As creative lobby groups have been shouting all over social media in the last week or so, this is the wrong way round. We have copyright laws which rightly protect the work of creators - the tech giants must respect them. Placing the burden on creatives to opt out is the wrong way round. The government is giving in to American tech billionaires over the interests of Britain's world-leading creative sector.”

Among the Cambridge members of the society are Dr Una McCormack, Pippa Goodhart, Susan Grossey, Anne Rooney, Rosemary Hayes, James Richards and Chloe Savage.

The government is now analysing the consultation feedback.