In a surprising turn of events, media titan Rupert Murdoch has teamed up with a host of prominent artists, including Radiohead’s Thom Yorke, actors Kevin Bacon and Julianne Moore, and acclaimed author Kazuo Ishiguro, to confront artificial intelligence companies over the unauthorized use of their creative works. This week, they publicly challenged these tech firms, asserting that their intellectual property is being exploited without consent to train powerful AI models.
This movement has gained significant traction, with over 13,000 creative professionals across literature, music, film, theater, and television signing a statement condemning AI companies for utilizing their creations without proper licensing. By the end of the week, that number surged to nearly 25,000, as more artists rallied to the cause.
Murdoch, who heads News Corp—publisher of notable newspapers like The Wall Street Journal, The Times, and The Sun—recently initiated legal proceedings against the AI-powered search engine Perplexity, claiming it has unlawfully duplicated journalism from his U.S. publications. This alliance of artists aims to refute the notion that their works can be appropriated for AI training under the principle of “fair use,” a legal concept in the U.S. that permits the use of copyrighted material without permission. Their frustration mounts from the realization that these AI systems can produce new works that directly compete with what human creators produce.
This concern was a significant issue during the Hollywood strikes last year, where actors and writers fought to ensure that evolving technologies would complement their work rather than replace it. As the legal battles continue, the outcome could determine whether these artists will find success in their fight for copyright protection.
In the U.S., legal actions are underway against tech companies by artists challenging image generators and AI music creators. Notable authors like John Grisham and George R.R. Martin are part of a lawsuit against OpenAI, the developer of ChatGPT, asserting copyright infringements. In the push for fair compensation from AI developers for content usage, publishers are also seeking legal pathways to negotiate licensing agreements.
Prominent publishing houses, including Vogue’s Condé Nast, the Financial Times, and Reuters, have already established content agreements with various AI companies. News Corp recently signed a substantial five-year contract with OpenAI, valued at $250 million. In stark contrast, The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and issued a cease and desist letter to Perplexity.
Across the Atlantic in the UK, AI companies are advocating for legislative changes that would permit them to continue their operations while minimizing the risk of infringing on intellectual property rights. Currently, the use of text and data mining for training generative AI tools is restricted to non-commercial research purposes.
This week, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella called for a reevaluation of what constitutes “fair use,” suggesting that large language models do not simply reproduce the information they are trained on, which would usually constitute copyright infringement. Meanwhile, Labour’s newly appointed minister for AI and digital government, Feryal Clark, expressed her desire to resolve the copyright disputes between creative industries and AI companies by year-end, possibly through amendments to existing laws or new legislation that could allow data scraping for commercial purposes.
Dan Conway, CEO of the Publishers Association, criticized tech companies for benefiting from British content without compensation while lobbying to weaken local laws. “A part of doing business is paying for the content you use. The Labour government has a historic chance to shape responsible AI policy in the UK,” he noted, emphasizing the need for collaborative licensing agreements between creative sectors and AI firms.
As news organizations publicly oppose the exploitation of their content, many are quietly adopting AI to streamline editorial processes, raising concerns among staff about potential job losses. Last month, the National Union of Journalists launched the “Journalism before Algorithms” campaign, emphasizing the precarious landscape for journalists amid stagnant pay and staff reductions.
Niamh Burns, a senior research analyst at Enders Analysis, remarked on the cautious adoption of AI tools by publishers, stating that while there is experimentation, the extent of integration depends heavily on each media organization’s financial pressures. As companies like BuzzFeed shift rapidly towards AI despite significant layoffs, the overall media landscape remains tentative, particularly among traditional outlets that are laying down strict guidelines for AI involvement.
With an eye on the future, Burns warned that those media companies facing immediate financial challenges may over-rely on AI, opting for quantity of content over quality. “For those relying heavily on advertising from social media traffic, AI could seem like a solution. However, the long-term consequences on quality and competitiveness should not be underestimated,” she cautioned.
