6 minute read
On Tuesday, over 1,000 musicians, composers, and industry veterans made a powerful statement—not through lyrics, melodies, or orchestration, but through silence.
Artists including Kate Bush, Billy Ocean, Annie Lennox, Hans Zimmer, Cat Stevens, Damon Albarn, Tori Amos, Bastille, Jamiroquai, and The Clash joined forces to release an unusual album, “Is This What We Want?”.
The album does not contain traditional music.
It features recordings of empty studios and performance spaces, filled only with faint echoes, the soft shuffle of movement, the creak of doors, and the rustling of papers.
The artists behind the album want to warn the world about the dangers of proposed UK copyright law changes, which they believe could hand control of their work to artificial intelligence developers.
The proposed legislation, introduced late last year, seeks to revamp copyright regulations to favor AI development in the UK.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has positioned the country as a potential leader in artificial intelligence and has actively pursued policies to encourage AI research and business growth.
The UK government has already demonstrated its willingness to break from European Union policies and forge its own path on AI regulation.
Currently, copyright law gives musicians full control over how their work is used.
However, the proposed change would introduce a “lawful access” rule, which would allow AI developers to train their models on any material they can access legally without first obtaining a license or permission from the creators.
The only way for artists to prevent their work from being used in AI training would be through an opt-out system, which places the burden of protection entirely on the musicians rather than on AI companies.
Many artists and copyright advocates argue that this reverses the traditional concept of copyright law, which historically has required those who wish to use copyrighted material to seek permission first.
The opt-out system would require artists to actively monitor and request the removal of their work from AI datasets—a near-impossible task, given how quickly content spreads online.
Every track on “Is This What We Want?” contributes to the protest.
The album’s 12 tracks spell out a chilling message when read in order:
“The British government must not legalize music theft to benefit AI companies.”
Each track is credited to the artists involved in the project, even though not all directly contributed to the recordings.
This was a conscious decision to show solidarity among musicians who believe the proposed changes pose an existential threat to their industry.
Ed Newton-Rex, the founder of Fairly Trained, a nonprofit organization that certifies AI companies for ethical training data practices, was one of the driving forces behind the album.
He has been a vocal critic of the opt-out system, claiming it misleads creators into thinking their work is protected when, in reality, it makes it easier for AI companies to use their content without consent.
His concerns are not unfounded.
AI developers have repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to circumvent copyright laws to train their models.
Similar legal disputes are playing out in the journalism industry, with The New York Times suing OpenAI and Microsoft over the unauthorized use of its news content to train AI models.
Many artists fear AI-generated music, fueled by data from human-created songs, could flood the industry and push human musicians out of their careers.
Kate Bush, a defining voice in the music industry for decades, expressed deep concern over the future of artistic expression in the age of AI.
She wondered whether musicians’ voices would soon be lost, overtaken by algorithmic creations designed to mimic human emotion and originality.
Paul McCartney, Elton John, and Dua Lipa have also joined the fight.
McCartney has been particularly outspoken about the importance of protecting the next generation of musicians, urging the government to uphold its duty to preserve creative industries.
During an appearance on BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, McCartney described a troubling scenario in which young artists lose control of their work and receive no compensation while tech giants freely exploit their music.
He was one of several musicians who previously signed a petition urging stronger regulations on AI-generated content, alongside artists like Thom Yorke of Radiohead, Bjorn Ulvaeus of ABBA, and Robert Smith of The Cure.
Elton John also criticized the proposed legislation, arguing that it would hand over musicians’ work to AI companies for free.
In an interview with The Sunday Times, he shared his concern that these changes could make it even harder for young musicians to start a career in the UK’s creative industry in an already challenging industry.
The Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology (DSIT) has defended the proposed law, saying that current copyright rules are stopping AI companies and artists from reaching their full potential.
The department claims the new system balances technological progress with protecting artists’ rights.
A government spokesperson said that no final decisions have been made and that officials are still reviewing public feedback before making official changes.
However, since the UK is pushing to become a leader in AI, many artists worry that the government will prioritize AI industry growth over protecting creators.
As the public consultation period for the proposal ended, the music industry made one final push to raise awareness and rally support.
Several UK newspapers featured identical front-page protest images with the bold slogan: “Make it fair: The government wants to change the UK’s laws to favor big tech platforms so they can use British creative content.”
Meanwhile, a coalition of artists and advocacy groups—including the Creative Rights in AI Coalition—continues to argue that AI companies should obtain permission before using copyrighted content.
They believe creating a fair licensing system for AI-generated content is the only way to help the AI industry and musicians succeed without harming the music business.
While “Is This What We Want?” is a silent album, its message is loud and clear: if AI companies are allowed to mine music without compensation, the future of the creative industry is at stake.
The question now is whether the UK government will listen to the voices of its most influential musicians or pursue a copyright regime that favors AI development over artistic integrity.
The Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York and M+ in Hong Kong have signed an agreement to work…
It looks like we’re all in for quite a wait for The Batman Part II, but at least we know…
If you’re a fan of A Court of Thorns and Roses (ACOTAR), you’ve probably been eagerly waiting for the next…
