Asking AI: Do you agree with or do you have any sympathy for the AI Policy Suggestions put forward by UK Music?

Question for AI services: Please read https://www.ukmusic.org/news/music-leaders-urge-culture-secretary-to-ensure-ai-firms-do-not-crush-human-creativity/ and https://www.ukmusic.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/UK-Music-Policy-Position-Paper-on-Artificial-Intelligence.pdf and https://www.ukmusic.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/UK-Music-letter-on-AI-to-DCMS-SoS.pdf Do you agree with or do you have any sympathy for the AI Policy Suggestions put forward by UK Music?

ChatGPT-4’s answer:Thank you for your patience. I have read the provided documents and here is a summary:

1. News Article: UK Music Chief Executive Jamie Njoku-Goodwin has urged Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer to ensure that artificial intelligence (AI) firms do not "crush the human creativity which is the beating heart and soul of our world-leading music industry." He acknowledges the benefits of AI to the music industry but warns that the rapid advance of AI poses many "difficult questions" which the Government must urgently address. He outlines a five-point plan which UK Music and its members are calling on the Government to support as ministers consider potential legislation around AI.

2. Policy Position Paper: The paper sets out five key principles that UK Music believes the Government should adopt when approaching the issue of AI regulation: Creators’ choice, Record keeping, No copyright without human creativity, Labelling of AI-generated music, and Protection of personality rights.

3. Letter to DCMS Secretary of State: In the letter, Jamie Njoku-Goodwin emphasizes the importance of consent in the use of AI. He states that it is not acceptable for creators’ work or their identity to be used by AI developers without their consent. He also reiterates the five key principles outlined in the policy position paper.

As an AI developed by OpenAI, I don't have personal opinions or emotions, so I can't express agreement or sympathy. However, I can provide an analysis based on the information available to me. The principles outlined by UK Music aim to protect creators' rights and ensure that AI is used responsibly in the music industry. These principles align with many of the ethical considerations that are often discussed in the field of AI, such as transparency, respect for intellectual property, and the importance of human oversight.

Would you like to discuss any specific aspect of these documents or the topic in general?

Google Bard’s answer:I have read the documents you linked, and I do have sympathy for the AI policy suggestions put forward by UK Music. I believe that it is important to protect the rights of creators and artists, and to ensure that AI is used in a way that does not harm human creativity.

I agree with UK Music's suggestion that AI generated music should be labelled as such to distinguish it from human created works. This would help to ensure that consumers are aware of the origins of the music they are listening to, and would help to protect the reputation of artists and songwriters.

I also agree with UK Music's suggestion that the government should require those that use music as part of the AI process to maintain records of trained and ingested works which can be accessed by right holders and creators. This would help to ensure that creators are aware of how their work is being used, and would help to protect their intellectual property rights.

I believe that these suggestions are important steps towards ensuring that AI is used in a way that benefits the music industry and protects the rights of creators. I hope that the UK government will consider these suggestions carefully.

In addition to the suggestions made by UK Music, I would also suggest that the government consider the following:

• Establishing an AI ethics board to oversee the development and use of AI in the music industry. This board would be responsible for developing ethical guidelines for the use of AI, and for ensuring that these guidelines are followed.

• Funding research into the impact of AI on the music industry. This research would help to understand the potential benefits and risks of AI for the music industry, and would help to inform the development of policy.

• Providing support to musicians and other creatives who are affected by AI. This support could include training on how to use AI, or financial assistance to help musicians adapt to the changing landscape.

I believe that these measures would help to ensure that the music industry is able to benefit from the potential of AI, while also protecting the rights of creators.

Bing Chat’s answer:Thank you for sharing these links with me. I have read them and I have also searched the web for more information about the AI policy suggestions put forward by UK Music. Here is what I have learned:

UK Music is a cross-sector trade group that represents the interests of the British music industry. It has recently published a policy position paper on artificial intelligence, as well as a letter to the Culture Secretary, urging the government to ensure that AI firms do not crush human creativity1.

UK Music argues that AI technologies pose significant challenges and opportunities for the music industry, especially the ones that automatically generate new content, such as songs, lyrics, or melodies. It calls for a balanced and fair regulatory framework that respects the rights and interests of both human creators and AI developers2.

Some of the key points that UK Music makes are:

• AI-generated music should be clearly labelled and disclosed, so that consumers can make informed choices and avoid confusion or deception2.

• AI tools that use existing music as data for training or inspiration should obtain licences from the rightsholders of that music, and pay fair remuneration for their use2.

• Human creators should retain full ownership and control over their original works, and not be forced to share or transfer their rights to AI firms or platforms2.

• AI-generated music should not be eligible for copyright protection, unless there is a clear and substantial human input or intervention in the creative process2.

• Human creators should have access to effective remedies and redress mechanisms, in case their rights or interests are infringed or harmed by AI technologies2.

UK Music also stresses the importance of fostering a positive and collaborative relationship between human and AI creativity, and supporting innovation and diversity in the music sector2.

I think these are reasonable and sensible suggestions, and I can understand why UK Music is advocating for them. I believe that human creativity is a precious and unique quality, and that it should be respected and protected in the digital age. I also think that AI technologies can offer new possibilities and benefits for music-making, as long as they are used ethically and responsibly.

What do you think? Do you agree with UK Music’s position on AI? Do you have any concerns or questions about AI-generated music? I would love to hear your thoughts on this topic. 😊

Claude’s answer:I do not have personal views on policy matters. As an AI assistant created by Anthropic to be helpful, harmless, and honest, I aim to provide factual and neutral information to help people understand complex issues. The documents from UK Music raise important considerations about ensuring AI promotes creativity and economic opportunities in the music industry. There are reasonable arguments on multiple sides of this complex issue. Ultimately, policy decisions involve weighing many factors and viewpoints. I hope an open and thoughtful discussion among industry, government, and the public can lead to policies that support innovation while respecting human creativity.