BBC and Sky slam AI copyright plans

BBC and Sky Criticize AI Copyright Proposals

Media giants BBC and Sky have voiced strong opposition to government proposals that would allow tech firms to use copyright-protected works without seeking permission. The executives argue that such a move could undermine the £125bn creative sector, emphasizing the need for an opt-in rule that requires licensing agreements.

The controversy stems from a consultation in February, where initial proposals suggested that AI companies could access creative works unless copyright holders explicitly opted out. This approach has raised concerns that it would devalue the creative industry, as smaller producers may struggle to protect their intellectual property.

Sky's group chief executive, Dana Strong, compared the proposal to the fight against TV piracy, highlighting the challenges small companies face in safeguarding their rights. She argued that policing an opt-out system would be impractical, as it would require significant resources that smaller producers lack.

BBC director general Tim Davie echoed these concerns, stressing the urgency of implementing protections for the creative industry. He warned that without swift action, the sector could face a crisis as the consultation continues.

The Case for an Opt-In System

Both BBC and Sky are advocating for an opt-in system, where AI companies must obtain permission and negotiate licensing agreements with copyright holders before using their content. This approach, they argue, would ensure that creators are fairly compensated for their work and maintain control over how their intellectual property is used.

Culture secretary Lisa Nandy and technology secretary Peter Kyle have acknowledged the industry's concerns and plan to hold roundtable discussions with creative stakeholders. They emphasized the need to find a balanced solution that benefits both the creative and tech industries.

Government Concessions and Industry Reaction

The government has already made some concessions, including committing to an economic impact assessment of the proposed copyright changes. However, the industry remains cautious, as recent analysis revealed that the technology secretary had 28 meetings with big tech representatives within six months, raising concerns about potential bias.

Despite these concessions, the creative industry continues to push for stronger protections, arguing that the future of the sector depends on fair and enforceable legislation.

Conclusion

The debate over AI copyright proposals highlights the tension between technological innovation and the protection of creative works. As discussions continue, the outcome will shape the future of the creative industry and its relationship with AI technology.