Will Keir Starmer’s AI Vision Overstep Copyright Boundaries?

Artificial intelligence remains the most significant topic in photo editing and photography in general, and the UK government’s newly announced strategy to establish the nation as an AI powerhouse is raising concerns among many photographers.

Voices from the creative sectors, including photography, are sounding alarms regarding the government’s extensive proposals aimed at advancing AI with the expectation of considerable social and economic advantages.

In addition to discussing ways AI could be utilized for repairing potholes or enhancing the efficiency of the NHS, the government appears to be considering a more hands-off approach towards copyright regulations.

This approach would permit companies to leverage copyrighted content (including photographs) for training their generative AI systems, unless the creator of such material explicitly opts out. “Legal ambiguity is jeopardizing investment in and utilization of AI technology,” asserts the government.

Stirring AI anxiety

In reaction, the Association of Photographers (AOP) released a statement firmly opposing any amendments to the UK’s ‘gold-standard’ copyright legislation. ‘We are required to pay for our gas and electricity… so why isn’t the initial focus of any new AI development opportunity proposal to reimburse creators whose works have been commercially utilized to advance generative-AI – for example, by providing them a dividend? This issue must be addressed first.’

Other organizations and individuals representing the creative sectors have voiced concerns that opt-out initiatives for generative AI will not offer sufficient protection and have yet to be effectively implemented globally.

AP has shared a variety of perspectives on the repercussions of AI on photography, with some voices expressing significant worry, while others are more reserved.

---

The AOP’s complete statement

In response to the UK Government’s AI Opportunities Action Plan1, released on Monday 13 January, the Association of Photographers urges the UK government to contemplate providing a favorable option for creators rather than the bleak prospect of displacement they will undoubtedly face if reform plans are executed.

Rather than calling for legislative change and unleashing unforeseen consequences by allowing certain major tech firms to exploit our creators’ cultural assets – including our photographers’ exceptional still and moving images – we ask the government to acknowledge that providing a favorable option doesn’t necessitate amending our ‘gold standard’ copyright law; it requires upholding the law to foster economic prosperity for creators.

As citizens, we are expected to pay for our gas and electricity, facing penalties for failure to comply. Hence, why isn’t the foundational aspect of any new AI development opportunity proposal to compensate creators whose works have been commercially exploited to develop generative-AI, such as by offering them a dividend? This matters must be resolved first.

Ethical AI development can indeed occur in the UK without surrendering control or transferring economic benefits to overseas corporations; otherwise, we will find ourselves as AI & creative ‘takers’ rather than AI & creative ‘makers’.

Following the announcement from the UK Government on their action plan, the Association of Photographers’ CEO, Isabelle Doran, commented:

“Creators based in Britain, such as professional photographers, have heavily relied on the existing UK copyright framework to develop their professional livelihoods and contribute to our economy.

The law regarding Text & Data Mining (TDM) is clear and straightforward; thus, it does not require reform. We have consistently indicated that an expanded TDM for commercial purposes will adversely affect creators – even with a newly proposed option to ‘opt out’.

We should be actively providing creators a protective environment from the unfair exploitation of their works online, instead of offering our cherished creative and cultural industry treasures as bait for major tech firms.

Numerous smaller AI developers in the UK already conduct their operations ethically and obtain licenses with consent from creators who choose to participate in AI development. For the benefit of all our futures, there must be a positive choice for creators, not an unavoidable despair.”