In the morning, Member States held informal meetings to continue discussions on the protection of broadcasting organisations. Previously, observers had been able to listen in to such discussions without being able to report on them. However, this time, participation and monitoring was restricted to Member States.
That break with recent tradition did not negatively affect attendance at the side event Generative AI and Music: How it works, Building Licensed Markets and the Industry’s Evidence organised by the International Confederation of Music Publishers (ICMP). Adriana Pérez-Gil (ICMP Senior Legal Advisor) guided John Phelan (ICMP Director General), Cassandra Strauss (Universal Music Group Senior Director, Strategic Technology), Jure Kralj (ICMP Senior Legal & Policy Executive), and Ed Newton-Rex (Fairly Trained CEO) as they delivered a compelling overview of the range of opportunities presented by ethical AI operators, and contrasted this with the challenges presented by other AI platforms that continue to insist on operating without licenses.
The session included clear examples of AI generated works that were obviously based on existing creative works, whether they be musical or audiovisual (I was not expecting to hear a shoddy AI rip off of All I want for Christmas during SCCR). The speakers made the case for licensing frameworks for AI use of music and presented examples of good transparency practices, including companies that publicly disclose their datasets and clearly identify AI-generated content, to enhance consumer trust and facilitate the recognition of such material. The AI platforms’ assertions that such transparency was difficult or impossible was unequivocally exposed as a myth.
In the afternoon, the session moved back to the plenary chamber and reopened to observers. Vice Chair Peter Labody provided a summary of the main points from the informals underlining the clear and respectful nature of those discussions. The summary was brief, going through the elements of discussion and whether there was broad agreement or whether further discussions (e.g. on Articles 7 and 8) were needed.
With that, the discussion switched to Exceptions and Limitations with Regional Group coordinators expressing their appreciation to the Chair and Vice Chair for their work on the Text Proposed in the Framework of Work Towards an Appropriate International Legal Instrument or Instruments on Limitations and Exceptions (SCCR/47/8), committing to constructive dialogue, and expressing their positions on these agenda items. The tensions simmering on Monday returned to the surface with well-worn positions being expressed on whether the current legal framework is sufficient or not, followed by exchanges over the nature of the General Assembly Mandate, whether the proposals amounted to binding or non-binding legal instruments, and whether work should begin on words without a specific instrument in mind. Observers took the floor to close the day with a number of creative sector organisations urging caution and underlining that the current copyright framework is sufficient. This was perhaps most forcefully presented by FIAPF (the International Federation of Film Producer Associations) which stated: A public interest benefit should never be devised to the detriment of those who create and produce copyright works.
The day concluded with the second side event of the day – AI and Music: License to Innovate, organised by the International Federation of Phonographic Industry (IFPI). More on that tomorrow.