🔗 Share this article

The single biggest danger to the career of authors and, consequently, to our society is not distracted audiences. It is AI.

British literary sector – worth over £11bn – has sat by while large technology firms “swept” protected works from the internet to develop their AI systems. In recent months, an AI startup resolved a massive infringement lawsuit, but the moment has clearly left the harbour, and big tech is moving forward with the content.

Being both a author representative and leader of one of the largest agencies in Europe, I am convinced this is a matter society should care about – not because we fear progress, but because we want to preserve human expression. Without the one thing that is intrinsic to being human – the capacity to think creatively, craft narratives and imagine new worlds – we will inhabit a lesser world.

Numerous acclaimed authors have expressed about why narratives are the essence of civilization and how an artist’s role is to reveal truths we may not want to hear. Having worked with authors like William Boyd and prominent storytellers, I understand first-hand where exceptional narrative art comes from.

Good literary creation is not a rehashing of previously published works. It is a recipe made up of personal experience, overcome adversity and grasped one’s historical context; it is the product of artistry, technique and obsession.

The need to write is not something that can be instilled – it is a drive that afflicts the writer. Truly dedicated writers are compelled to create. They could utilize spellcheck and language models, but few things would be more unacceptable to a creator than an idea being presented to them on their computer that they were then asked to “personalize”.

Not Every Automation Necessarily Is Harmful

Tools which displace the author, or that will work with them openly, is potentially beneficial. An artist scheduled for post-production may authorise utilization of existing material to finish a picture. It might reduce expenses, environmental impact and time. A writer may wish to accelerate their research by training their personal AI tools. Language tools could broaden the availability of global stories, adding to our literary heritage.

Such uses are worth discussing. Yet it should be a debate and remain open to the consumer. Thus far, intellectual property has frequently been used without compensation, and there are inadequate guardrails on platforms, production companies, and publishing houses.

Actions to Be Done?

It begins with some core standards for the industry to adopt. A protection framework for AI that protects two basic principles: permission and attribution.

• No AI system should be developed using an creator’s work without their clear, knowing permission.
• Tech companies should be required to disclose the data sources they have used, ensuring clarity so that rights owners know when their properties have been utilized.
• A creator should also be allowed to opt out their work clearly – without having to locate the option hidden beneath complex terms of legal fine print.

In cases where an artist finds that the technology is misrepresenting the meaning of their work so that it is distorted from the authentic work, they should be empowered to retract consent for its application.

It is also crucial to introduce a label system – akin to nutritional labeling – that restrict distributors from marketing machine-produced narratives without unambiguous credit. Similarly, creator protections must be reinforced, and this can only be implemented at the government tier and even on an international front – an international framework.

Lastly, corporations should not be permitted to cite “free usage” to excuse their scanning of other people’s work. This presents a serious threat to the protection of creative ownership. It misrepresents the initial purpose of the “educational exception” provision, which was intended for researchers to reference without fees a small portion from published content.

These basic rules may not seem especially urgent, but they will shape how future generations learn, how our national stories are shared, and how we define who we are.