Sir Elton John described the government as "absolute losers" and said he feels "incredibly betrayed" over plans to exempt technology firms from copyright laws. Speaking exclusively to Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, he said if ministers go ahead with plans to allow AI firms to use artists' content without paying, they would be "committing theft, thievery on a high scale". This week the government rejected proposals from the House of Lords to force AI companies to disclose what material they were using to develop their programmes. A government spokesperson said that "no changes" to copyright laws would be "considered unless we are completely satisfied they work for creators". Generative AI programmes mine, or learn, from vast amounts of data like text, images, or music online to generate new content which feels like it has been made by a human. Sir Elton said the "danger" is that, for young artists, "they haven't got the resources ... to fight big tech [firms]". "It's criminal, in that I feel incredibly betrayed," he added. "The House of Lords did a vote, and it was more than two to one in our favour," he said. "The government just looked at it as if to say, 'Hmm, well the old people ... like me can afford it.'" On Monday, the House of Lords voted by a 147 majority to amend the Data (Use and Access) Bill to add transparency requirements, which aim to ensure copyright holders have to give permission for their work to be used. But on Wednesday MPs in the House of Commons voted to reject this change, meaning the bill will continue to go back and forth between the two Houses until they reach an agreement on it. Sir Elton warned the government was on course to "rob young people of their legacy and their income", adding that he thought the government was "just being absolute losers, and I'm very angry about it". The singer said that Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer needed to "wise up" and described Technology Secretary Peter Kyle as "a bit of a moron". He said if the government does not change its plans, he would be ready to take ministers to court, saying that "we'll fight it all the way". Speaking alongside the 78-year-old, playwright James Graham said ministers "do understand the value of creativity... but what's frustrating is either the complacency or the willingness to let Silicon Valley tech bros get it all their own way". The chief executive of UK music, Tom Kiehl, told the BBC that the government is "on the brink" of offering up the country's music industry "as a sacrificial lamb in its efforts to cosy up to American-based tech giants". He added that the prime minister "must not sell" the next generation of singers, songwriters, musicians, and music creators "down the river and allow all that talent to be crushed by letting soulless AI bots plunder their work". Ahead of the vote in the House of Lords, Sir Elton joinedmore than 400 British musicians, writers, and artists in signing a letter calling on the prime minister to update copyright lawsin a way that protects them from artificial intelligence. Beatles singer Sir Paul McCartney, who also signed the letter,previously told the BBC there was a risk AI would create a "Wild West"in which artists' copyright was not properly protected. A government spokesperson said it wants the UK's creative industries and AI companies to "flourish, which is why we're consulting on a package of measures that we hope will work for both sectors". The spokesperson said it was "vital" the government worked through responses to a consultation on proposals to allow developers to use creators' content unless rights holders elected to "opt out". They added that it was "equally important that we put in the groundwork now as we consider the next steps". "That is why we have committed to publishing a report and economic impact assessment - exploring the broad range of issues and options on all sides of the debate." The full interview with Sir Elton John will be onSunday with Laura Kuenssbergon Sunday 18 January at 09:00 BST. Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert political insight and insider stories every Thursday.
Elton John brands government 'losers' over AI copyright plans
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Elton John Criticizes UK Government Plans on AI Copyright Exemptions"
Bbc News
6.1
TruthLens AI Summary
Sir Elton John has expressed his deep frustration with the UK government's plans regarding copyright laws related to artificial intelligence (AI), labeling ministers as 'absolute losers' and feeling 'incredibly betrayed.' In an exclusive interview with Laura Kuenssberg, he criticized the government's intention to exempt technology firms from copyright laws that would allow them to use artists' content without compensation. Sir Elton emphasized that such actions would amount to 'theft on a high scale,' particularly harming young artists who lack the resources to stand up against large tech companies. He pointed out that the House of Lords had overwhelmingly voted in favor of amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill, which aimed to ensure transparency and protect the rights of copyright holders. However, these proposals were rejected by the House of Commons, leading to an ongoing tug-of-war between the two Houses as they seek a resolution. Sir Elton's impassioned remarks reflect a broader concern within the creative community regarding the impact of AI on artistic integrity and compensation.
In addition to Sir Elton's comments, playwright James Graham echoed the sentiment that while government officials may recognize the importance of creativity, they seem complacent or willing to allow major tech companies to exploit artists' work. Tom Kiehl, the chief executive of UK music, warned that the government risks sacrificing the music industry in its efforts to align with American tech giants. He urged the Prime Minister not to compromise the future of young artists by permitting AI technology to erode their rights. Ahead of the vote in the House of Lords, Sir Elton joined over 400 British musicians, writers, and artists in signing a letter demanding updates to copyright laws to safeguard their work from AI misuse. The government, for its part, has stated its desire to support both the creative industries and AI development, indicating ongoing consultations to find a balance. The full details of Sir Elton's interview will be aired on January 18, providing further insights into this contentious issue.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article addresses the tensions surrounding the UK's proposed changes to copyright laws in relation to artificial intelligence (AI) and the concerns voiced by Sir Elton John, a prominent figure in the music industry. His strong remarks highlight a growing frustration among artists regarding the potential exploitation of their work by technology firms.
Government's Position and Artist Concerns
Sir Elton John's criticism of the government reflects a broader anxiety among creators about the implications of AI in the creative sector. The government's rejection of amendments that would require AI companies to reveal the sources of their training data signals a disregard for the rights of artists. By labeling ministers as "absolute losers," John encapsulates the sentiment of betrayal felt by many in the creative community, particularly younger artists who may lack the resources to defend their rights against powerful tech companies.
Public Sentiment and Potential Manipulation
The article seems to aim at rallying public support for artists' rights while simultaneously portraying the government as out of touch with the needs of the creative community. The emotional language used by John, such as "theft" and "criminal," is likely to evoke a strong reaction from readers, potentially swaying public opinion against government actions. This could be seen as a form of manipulation, tapping into feelings of injustice and rallying support for a cause that resonates with many.
Trustworthiness and Truthfulness
The reliability of the article hinges on the accuracy of the statements made by John and the portrayal of government actions. Given that John is a credible figure within the music industry, his opinions carry weight. However, the narrative may be somewhat biased, focusing primarily on the artists' perspective without fully exploring the rationale behind the government's decisions.
Societal and Economic Impact
This news could influence public discourse around copyright laws and the future of AI in creative industries. If the government persists in its current stance, it may exacerbate tensions between artists and tech companies, potentially leading to protests or lobbying efforts from the creative sector. The economic implications could be significant, as a loss of income for artists could affect their livelihoods and the broader music industry.
Target Audience and Support Base
The message seems to resonate more with younger artists and those in the creative community who feel threatened by the potential misuse of their work. It may also appeal to general audiences who empathize with the plight of artists fighting against corporate interests.
Market Implications
While the article may not directly impact stock markets, it could influence the valuation of tech companies involved in AI, especially if public sentiment shifts significantly. Companies in the creative and tech sectors may face increased scrutiny, which could affect their stock performance.
Global Context
In the broader context of global discussions around AI and copyright, this article highlights ongoing debates about intellectual property rights in an increasingly digital world. The issues raised are part of a larger conversation happening globally, where different countries are grappling with how to regulate the use of AI in creative fields.
AI Influence in Reporting
It is plausible that AI tools may have been used in crafting the article, particularly in generating specific phrases or summarizing John’s statements. The choice of language and framing could subtly guide readers’ perceptions, indicating a potential influence of AI in the editorial process.
In summary, the article effectively highlights the conflict between artists and technology firms regarding copyright laws, stirring public sentiment and potentially mobilizing support for artists' rights. However, it may also reflect a bias that could lead to manipulation of public opinion.