Advertisement
Advertisement

UK tries to reconcile copyright demands with AI growth agenda

Lobbyists in the music business, including jazz trumpeter Chris Hodgkins, want to prevent artificial intelligence developers from mining music data without explicit permission from the copyright holder

Following the publication of the UK government’s Copyright and AI: Consultation, trumpeter Chris Hodgkins is urging interested parties to write to their MP to ask that there be no copyright exceptions requiring creator opt-out in any legislation on artificial intelligence (AI).

The introduction of a copyright exception requiring creator opt-out would mean that AI companies can mine music data without permission or payment, unless the copyright holder actively denies such access.

- Advertisement -

In Copyright and AI: Consultation the UK government recognises the competing interests of, on the one hand, AI developers and on the other copyright protection and remuneration. Limiting AI activity, it’s argued, would damage the UK as an AI investment destination and thus UK economic growth. Removing barriers to data mining by AI would likely entail loss of copyright and creator remuneration.

Chris Hodgkins, and the PRS (Performing Rights Society), have come down on the side of reducing unrestricted data mining and protecting copyright, particularly by preventing implementation of a copyright exception requiring creator opt-out. Chris Hodgkins’ website carries a document explaining their position.

- Advertisement -

This new copyright debate throws up interesting arguments on the matter of copying and derivation in the arts and in jazz in particular. The parameters of a composition – melody, chord structure, etc. – are clearly defined and any direct copying is obvious. But this hasn’t stopped creative work coming from imitation and mutation. Indeed, without imitation, it’s hard to imagine music ever progressing. Furthermore, interpretation – instrumentation, phrasing, etc. – is a far less tangible and thus chargeable asset.

In jazz, the matter is more complicated because improvisation plays a large part in the identity of a jazz recording and of its players. For decades, improvising musicians have, to put it in lobbyist terms, “ripped off” each other’s work but rarely, if ever, has a copyright case ensued and the practice was seen as an intrinsic element of musical interaction and community. Where was the copyright protection for the Louis Armstrong, Charlie Parker or John Coltrane improvising style, something which was a great innovation and trademark of the musician, as much as any composition? Was such protection even possible? And if it existed, could such limitation ever have delivered the creative evolution of jazz style? If one soloist were forbidden from copying another except on payment of a fee, would anyone have bothered to copy? Or further, would any child learn to talk if it had to thumbprint an IOU before copying its parent’s speech?

- Advertisement -

This is, of course, in the human field and about ownership, but on the aesthetic level, does it matter that machines do the work of imitation and progress if the resultant work is effective? Perhaps not. But leaving that question aside, can a machine, lacking volition, ever be as creative as a motivated musician?

Further, it seems unlikely that AI will ever replace live performance, or at least not until robotics are advanced to an as yet unimaginable degree. In recent decades live performance experienced a revival as the tour-to-promote-the-record formula was inverted to the point that, apparently, live performance was more lucrative than record sales. Live performance, apart from being a different experience from record-listening, is also an uncopiable, singular event. Perhaps a future, most ideal and most remunerative musical world will be one where musicians perform more (for a fee) and copy each other more (for free) to produce organic, human-driven evolution, rather as before recording arrived. Would the machines understand, let alone win in such a cutting contest? That would be extraordinary progress.

Jazz Journal reported one passable AI jazz effort, complete with sample track, before Christmas.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

Read more

More articles