The Way Forward for Artificial Intelligence Must Be Responsible (Guest Column)

Throughout history, music has embraced constructive change and innovation. And we will do so again as we address the opportunities and risks of artificial intelligence.

Done right, AI should provide avenues for new growth and artistic achievement. When creators' rights are respected, innovation thrives.

Already, music companies have unveiled exciting projects that use AI technologies in groundbreaking ways — with the full consent and participation of the artists and rights holders involved. Working with responsible AI companies, music companies are finding new ways to improve production and marketing, gain new insights from data and research, and improve wellness and health. They've used it to help identify new audiences for artists and pioneer new ways to celebrate iconic catalogs and artists. This is just the beginning of a new era of possibilities.

However, many AI developers are resisting the creative sector's collective efforts to develop a responsible AI policy framework, even though the elements of such a framework are clear and common sense. In short, AI companies must honor:

These fundamental, consensual principles are detailed by the Human Art Campaign and is essentially supported by the entire creative community. They define a basis for the responsible development and growth of artificial intelligence.

But as it were, some of Big Tech's worst instincts have returned. Some AI developers claim it's “fair use” to scrape copyrighted music so it can be copied and repackaged from their models. This is simply wrong.

So to speak, this is digital theft.

In every legal market in the world, using the property of others requires the owner's consent and agreed compensation. Together, for example, music and technology have developed a burgeoning streaming market based on the common-sense principle that the use of copyrighted creative works requires permission and consent.

Indeed, the developers' claim that they can use decades of iconic and highly valuable AI recordings without bothering to claim or pay the rights holders is so far-fetched that former Stability AI developer Ed Newton-Rex quit his job in November rather than join an extreme effort to rip off artists and appropriate their work, explaining via X:

“Billion-dollar companies train, without permission, productive AI models on creator projects, which are then used to create new content that in many cases can compete with the original projects. I do not see how this can be accepted[.]”

Is not.

This is why transparency is essential. AI developers must keep accurate records of the copyrighted works used by their models and make them available to rights holders seeking to enforce their rights. We need rules that require developers to keep sufficiently detailed records and share that information — or face the consequences if they don't. We were pleased to see that the European Union enshrined this as a core principle in its landmark AI law.

AI policy must also establish clear rules that protect each performer's right to their own voice, image, name and likeness — the most fundamental cornerstones of individual identity. AI spoofs that mine an artist's body of work to create artificial voice copies and clones, fake fashion endorsements, or portray people in non-consensual ways represent the worst kind of personal invasion. Congress must end the misappropriation of the most central elements of individual human identity.

These are the challenges of 2024.

Either we work to continue a strong and sustainable foundation for music in the age of genetic AI that advances both art and technology together, or generative AI turns into another “move fast and break” innovation that fails to deliver anything of value while eroding our culture.

These are the choices policymakers will face this coming year. Let's work to help them get on the right path.

Mitch Glazier is President/CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America.