Latest news with #GilesMartin
Daily Mail
07-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Don't Let It Be! Son of legendary Beatles producer demands Labour 'listen to artists' as he joins Mail campaign against controversial AI proposals
The son of legendary Beatles producer Sir George Martin has demanded the Government 'listen to artists' over controversial AI proposals that would let tech firms use their work for free. Giles Martin used Artificial Intelligence to 'reunite' The Beatles for the John Lennon hit Now And Then two years ago, but warns Labour 's plan for the technology 'makes no sense at all'. It comes as the Government once more forced out amendments to the Bill which would have bolstered the protection of artists' copyright, in another blow for Britain's world-leading creative industry. Mr Martin earlier hit out at the 'nonsensical' move to allow Big Tech to use creatives' work to train their algorithms for free unless the artists 'opt out'. The Data (Use and Access) Bill primarily covers data-sharing agreements, but has received a backlash from the likes of UK Music after transparency safeguards were removed at the committee stage. Some MPs had wanted to reintroduce the amendments which would protect copyright by forcing firms training AI models to disclose whether work by a human creator has been used. But in a vote in Parliament last night the Government successfully resisted this. British songs, films, paintings and news articles are protected under UK copyright law. But the Government proposes giving Big Tech an 'exception', allowing them to access such works to train generative AI models, without permission or payment, unless creators 'opt-out' of letting them. Ahead of the vote, Mr Martin, a Grammy-winning producer, joined fellow creatives in a protest calling on Labour to 'Make It Fair'. He said: 'It makes no sense at all the idea of opting out. The Government has a lot of financiers and not many artists looking at this, and they seem overly impressed by tech firms making false promises.' He said AI was 'not a bad thing' but added: 'It's like The Little Mermaid – you should own your own voice.'
Sky News
07-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Sky News
Giles Martin on AI plans: 'It's like saying you can burgle my house unless I ask you not to'
Producer Giles Martin has said plans to allow AI firms to use artists' work without permission, unless creators opt out, is like criminals being given free rein to burgle houses unless they are specifically told not to. Martin, who is the son of Beatles producer George Martin and worked with Sir Paul McCartney on the Get Back documentary series and the 2023 Beatles track Now And Then, spoke to Sky News at a UK Music protest at Westminster coinciding with a parliamentary debate on the issue. Under the plans, an exemption to copyright would be created for training artificial intelligence (AI), so tech firms would not need a licence to use copyrighted material - rather, creators would need to opt out to prevent their work from being used. Creatives say if anything it should be opt-in rather than out, and are calling on the government to scrap the proposals and stop AI developers "stealing" their work "without payment or permission". "If you create something unique it should be unique to you," says Martin. "It shouldn't be able to be harvested and then used by other people. Or if it is, it should be with your permission... it shouldn't be up to governments or big tech." Sir Elton John and Simon Cowell are among the celebrities who have backed a campaign opposing the proposals, and Sir Paul has also spoken out against them. "This is about young artists," says Martin. "If a young Paul McCartney at the age of 20 or 22 wrote Yesterday, now... big tech would almost be able to harvest that song and use it for their own means. It doesn't make any sense, this ruling of opting out - where essentially it's like saying, 'you can burgle my house unless I ask you not to'." 'I'm not anti-AI - it's a question of permission' The Beatles' track Now And Then was written and recorded by John Lennon in New York in the late 1970s, and AI was used to extract his vocals for the 2023 release. The Get Back documentary also used audio restoration technology, allowing music and vocals to be isolated. "I'm not anti [AI], I'm not saying we should go back to writing on scribes," Martin said. "But I do think that it's a question of artist's permission." Using AI to "excavate" Lennon's voice was with the permission of the late singer's estate, he said, and is "different from me getting a 3D printer to make a John Lennon". He added: "The idea of, for example, whoever your favourite artist is - the future is, you get home from work and they'll sing you a song, especially designed for you, by that artist, by that voice. And it'll make you feel better because AI will know how you're feeling at that time. That's maybe a reality. Whoever that artist is, they should probably have a say in that voice." Crispin Hunt, of 1990s band The Longpigs, who also attended the protest, said "all technology needs some kind of oversight". "If you remove the ability for the world to make a living out of creativity, or if you devalue creativity to such an extent that that it becomes a hobby and worthless to do, then humanity in life will be far less rich because it's art and culture that makes life richer," he said. "And that's why the companies want it for free." The Data (Use and Access) Bill primarily covers data-sharing agreements, but transparency safeguards were removed at committee stage. Critics say changes need to be made to ensure that companies training generative AI models disclose whether work by a human creator has been used and protect creatives under existing copyright rules. In February, more than 1,000 artists and musicians including Kate Bush, Damon Albarn, Sam Fender and Annie Lennox released a silent album in protest at the proposed changes. At that time, a government spokesperson said the UK's current rules were "holding back the creative industries, media and AI sector from realising their full potential - and that cannot continue". The spokesperson said they were consulting on proposals that better protect the "interests of both AI developers and right holders" and to deliver a solution "which allows both to thrive".
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Giles Martin on AI plans: 'It's like saying you can burgle my house unless I ask you not to'
Giles Martin on AI plans: 'It's like saying you can burgle my house unless I ask you not to' Producer Giles Martin has said plans to allow AI firms to use artists' work without permission, unless creators opt out, is like criminals being given free rein to burgle houses unless they are specifically told not to. Martin, who is the son of Beatles producer George Martin and worked with Sir Paul McCartney on the Get Back documentary series and the 2023 Beatles track Now And Then, spoke to Sky News at a UK Music protest at Westminster coinciding with a parliamentary debate on the issue. Under the plans, an exemption to copyright would be created for training artificial intelligence (AI), so tech firms would not need a licence to use copyrighted material - rather, creators would need to opt out to prevent their work from being used. Creatives say if anything it should be opt-in rather than out, and are calling on the government to scrap the proposals and stop AI developers "stealing" their work "without payment or permission". ADVERTISEMENT "If you create something unique it should be unique to you," says Martin. "It shouldn't be able to be harvested and then used by other people. Or if it is, it should be with your permission... it shouldn't be up to governments or big tech." Sir Elton John and Simon Cowell are among the celebrities who have backed a campaign opposing the proposals, and Sir Paul has also spoken out against them. "This is about young artists," says Martin. "If a young Paul McCartney at the age of 20 or 22 wrote Yesterday, now... big tech would almost be able to harvest that song and use it for their own means. It doesn't make any sense, this ruling of opting out - where essentially it's like saying, 'you can burgle my house unless I ask you not to'." 'I'm not anti-AI - it's a question of permission' The Beatles' track Now And Then was written and recorded by John Lennon in New York in the late 1970s, and AI was used to extract his vocals for the 2023 release. The Get Back documentary also used audio restoration technology, allowing music and vocals to be isolated. ADVERTISEMENT "I'm not anti [AI], I'm not saying we should go back to writing on scribes," Martin said. "But I do think that it's a question of artist's permission." Using AI to "excavate" Lennon's voice was with the permission of the late singer's estate, he said, and is "different from me getting a 3D printer to make a John Lennon". He added: "The idea of, for example, whoever your favourite artist is - the future is, you get home from work and they'll sing you a song, especially designed for you, by that artist, by that voice. And it'll make you feel better because AI will know how you're feeling at that time. That's maybe a reality. Whoever that artist is, they should probably have a say in that voice." Read more: Authors 'absolutely sick' to discover books in 'shadow library' AI tool could be game-changer in battle against Alzheimer's Crispin Hunt, of 1990s band The Longpigs, who also attended the protest, said "all technology needs some kind of oversight". ADVERTISEMENT "If you remove the ability for the world to make a living out of creativity, or if you devalue creativity to such an extent that that it becomes a hobby and worthless to do, then humanity in life will be far less rich because it's art and culture that makes life richer," he said. "And that's why the companies want it for free." The Data (Use and Access) Bill primarily covers data-sharing agreements, but transparency safeguards were removed at committee stage. Critics say changes need to be made to ensure that companies training generative AI models disclose whether work by a human creator has been used and protect creatives under existing copyright rules. In February, more than 1,000 artists and musicians including Kate Bush, Damon Albarn, Sam Fender and Annie Lennox released a silent album in protest at the proposed changes. At that time, a government spokesperson said the UK's current rules were "holding back the creative industries, media and AI sector from realising their full potential - and that cannot continue". The spokesperson said they were consulting on proposals that better protect the "interests of both AI developers and right holders" and to deliver a solution "which allows both to thrive".
The Independent
07-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Independent
Producer Giles Martin says Government must do more to ‘protect artists' from AI
The Government must do more to 'protect artists' from AI developers as a data Bill moves through parliament, award-winning producer Giles Martin has said. Creatives, industry leaders and politicians gathered in central London to call on the Government to scrap plans that would allow AI developers to use creative content without permission or payment. It comes ahead of a parliamentary debate where MPs are due to discuss the Data (Use and Access) Bill which primarily covers data-sharing agreements, but has received a backlash from the likes of UK Music after transparency safeguards were removed at committee stage. Martin, a Grammy-winning English record producer and son of Beatles producer George Martin, attended the event claiming that the Government is not doing enough 'to protect artists'. He said: 'The Government seem to be more and more influenced by large technology companies, seem more impressed by them. '(If) Paul McCartney today writes Yesterday, that should belong to him, or he should just say what happens to that, or his voice. He should say what happens to his voice and right now, with the Government, they're not doing enough to protect artists. 'If you make something, if something is yours, it shouldn't be taken by a company and used without your permission. It's as simple as that.' UK Music claims the Bill would put creatives at risk after amendments put forward by Baroness Kidron to ensure transparency and international compliance safeguards were removed. The protest saw industry leaders and creatives call on the Government to make changes to the Bill to ensure that companies training generative AI models, such as ChatGPT, disclose whether work by a human creator has been used and protect creatives under existing copyright rules. Martin added: 'I think we should be worried about protecting artists, and actually not just artists. I think people's own personalities, their own voices, their own creations. I think that's what needs to grow. I think we need to look after the individual. I think tech companies will look after themselves.' Currently, British songs, films, paintings and news articles are protected under UK copyright law but a recent Government consultation proposed that it could offer tech companies free access to British music, films, books and more in order to train generative AI models without permission or payment, with creators required to 'opt-out' if they do not want their work to be used. Alex Sobel, MP for Leeds and Central and Headingley, who also attended the event, tabled an amendment to the Bill, requiring greater transparency from tech companies, ensuring that creatives know when their work is being used and how. Mr Sobel said: 'I'm very concerned about creator content being ingested by AI without any traceability. 'It's really important for creators, creative industries, that we have traceability, that we know what's going in, so artists and creative companies are not completely deluded of income in the future. 'It could absolutely ruin the creative industries in the UK.' The consequences of the Bill, if the amendments do not go through, could point to a future with 'no income in music' according to Mr Sobel. Describing how this would impact new artists if protections are not added to the Bill, Mr Sobel said: (AI models would) ingest a few different catalogues of similar artists, Dua Lipa, Calvin Harris, etc. You create a song, the song sounds just like them. The streamers just put those AI-generated songs. 'Artists don't get anything. Record companies don't get anything because nobody knows what was ingested in so people are listening to content but nobody's earning any income. And what happens in future? No new artists come through because there's no income in music. So then we just have legacy industry, and nothing new. 'What we don't want to do is stop progress. All we do is ensure that those creators and creative industries who generate the content are being recognised and enumerated. 'I think there's a lack of understanding about the real significant dangers, because it's a new area, because it's complicated, because it's confusing. 'There isn't just one form of AI. There's generative AI, which is this one we're worried about. But there's also assistive AI, where artists might use AI to create songs, that's completely different, and people can easily get confused between different types of AI and what they do and how they operate.' Lord Watson of Wyre Forest, chairman of UK Music, said: 'The UK music industry has always embraced tech. We've been at the forefront of using tech to create new sounds to give new energy to different generations of music. That's not going away. But what we're saying is there is a danger with this particular technology. 'We're at a critical point in the future of British music. Give our creators and music and businesses protections they need and deserve, and we can carry on going forward with the British music industry in good condition.'
