AI licensing
What is it
Generative AI has emerged as a dominant new technology, powering products and services and attracting sizeable investments. The large language models (LLMs) underpinning these systems are developed using vast amounts of existing content, including copyright works which are being used without consent, credit or compensation. The UK government launched a consultation on AI and copyright running from 19 December 2024 to February 25 2025 covering many of these issues that ALCS responded to.
In response to the Government consultation, ALCS opposed the Government’s preference for a Text and Data Mining exception, on the basis that it would harm writers. In this case, a fully functioning opt-out system would have to be devised for an exception to work, which is not possible as opt-out systems are unworkable, cannot protect writers and cannot ensure the reserving of their rights. Rather than changing copyright law, it must be properly enforced in its current state through transparency regulation and compensation for past infringements. Visit the ALCS website for the full consultation response.
Rich and diverse human creativity is invaluable socially, culturally and also economically given the huge financial and soft power dividends generated by the UK’s creative industries. It is essential that UK and international policy creates a mediated balance between supporting human creativity and enabling useful technologies to develop. A recent report by the Culture, Media & Sport Committee identified the need to address the current imbalance:
The Government must ensure that creators have proper mechanisms to enforce their consent and receive fair compensation for use of their work by AI developers.
The Authors’ Licensing and Collecting Society, which represents more than 125,000 writers, surveyed its members on AI and potential licensing solutions, receiving more than 13,500 responses.
The response from members clearly showed that writers felt there was no transparency about their work being used to train AI or writers giving permission for this use1. They strongly believe they should be asked for permission and should be credited and remunerated for this use. Top figures include:
- 91% felt that they should be asked for permission to use their works
- 77% don’t know if their works have been used to train AI or not
- Only 7% of those that knew their works have been used to train AI gave permission for this.
- 87% want to be credited when their works are used by AI systems
- 96% of writers would want to receive remuneration if their works have already been used to train AI, even if it meant no credit
- 92% of respondents said that they would want to receive compensation for any historic use of their work to train AI Find out more about the ALCS AI survey.
ALCS has published a set of AI principles, and we urge the Government to apply these in the development of future policy and regulation. A recent survey by the Society of Authors found that 95% of respondents agreed on the need for compensation for the use of their works in training AI systems.
Given the centrality of words to the development and value of LLMs, it is essential that writers’ representative bodies have a central role in developing fair models for compensation and authorisation. These bodies must also be part of any Government discussions around regulation designed to facilitate such models.