UK Artists release silent album in protest against AI using their work


2025-02-25 00:08:26 UTC
Paul Glynn

884e0970-f37a-11ef-896e-d7e7fb1719a4.jpg.webp
(Left to right) Annie Lennox, Kate Bush and Damon Albarn have all backed the silent album protest

More than 1,000 musicians - including Annie Lennox, Damon Albarn and Kate Bush - released a silent album on Tuesday in protest at the UK government's planned changes to copyright law, which they say would make it easier for AI companies to train models using copyrighted work without a licence.

Under the new proposals, AI developers will be able to use creators' content on the internet to help develop their models, unless the rights holders elect to "opt out".

The artists hope the album, entitled Is This What We Want?, will draw attention to the potential impact on livelihoods and the UK music industry.

All profits will be donated to the charity Help Musicians.

"In the music of the future, will our voices go unheard?" Kate Bush said in a statement.

A public consultation on the legal changes closes later on Tuesday.

The album - also backed by the likes of Billy Ocean, Ed O'Brien of Radiohead and Bastille's Dan Smith, as well as The Clash, Mystery Jets and Jamiroquai - features sound recordings of empty studios and performance spaces, demonstrating what the artists fear is the potential impact of the proposed law change.

The tracklisting for the record simply spells out the message: "The British government must not legalise music theft to benefit AI companies."

52d32360-f38a-11ef-896e-d7e7fb1719a4.jpg.webp
The tracklisting on the back cover of the album by Various Artists carries a message

The government is currently consulting on proposals that would allow AI companies to use material that is available online without respecting copyright if they are using it for text or data mining.

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.

The proposals would give artists or creators a so-called "rights reservation" – the ability to opt out.

But critics of the plan believe it is not possible for an individual writer or artist to notify thousands of different AI service providers that they do not want their content used in that way, or to monitor what has happened to their work across the whole internet.

A spokesman for the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) said in a statement on Tuesday that the UK's "current regime for copyright and AI is holding back the creative industries, media and AI sector from realising their full potential - and that cannot continue".

"That's why we have been consulting on a new approach that protects the interests of both AI developers and right holders and delivers a solution which allows both to thrive.

"We have engaged extensively with these sectors throughout and will continue to do so."

They added that "no decisions have been taken" and "no moves will be made until we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that delivers each of our objectives."

'Disastrous for musicians'​

Imogen Heap, Yusuf aka Cat Stevens and Riz Ahmed have also backed the silent album release as well as Tori Amos and Hans Zimmer.

Composer Max Richter, another of the artists involved in the album, noted how the plans not only have an impact on musicians but "impoverish creators" across the board, from writers to visual artists and beyond.

In 2023, UK music contributed a record £7.6 billion to the economy.

Organiser of the silent record, Ed Newton-Rex, said the proposals were not only "disastrous for musicians" in the UK but also "totally unnecessary", as the country can be "leaders in AI without throwing our world-leading creative industries under the bus".

He said the new record showed that "however the government tries to justify it, musicians themselves are united in their thorough condemnation of this ill-thought-through plan."

Singer-songwriter Naomi Kimpenu added: "We cannot be abandoned by the government and have our work stolen for the profit of big tech."
She said the plans would "shatter the prospects of so many emerging artists in the UK".

1f158d40-f364-11ef-9e61-71ee71f26eb1.jpg.webp
Tuesday's national newspapers carried a wrap-around advert for the Make It Fair Campaign

In January, Sir Paul McCartney told the BBC the proposed changes to copyright law could allow "rip off" technology that might make it impossible for musicians and artists to make a living.

In a letter to The Times, published on Monday, signatories including Sir Paul, Lord Lloyd Webber and Sir Stephen Fry said that changes to the law will allow big tech to raid the creative sectors.

They were joined by the likes of Bush, Ed Sheeran, Dua Lipa and Sting in opposing plans to change copyright laws.

On Tuesday, the UK's creative industries launched a campaign to highlight how their content is at risk of being given away for free to AI firms.

The Make it Fair campaign, which includes wrap-around adverts in national newspapers, is urging people to write to their MPs to object to the government's plans.
 
TFW can't get hired for shit because not californian or certain skin color with access to california corpo contacts for years and the people with comfy jobs are complaining about AI while I'm jamming my own art into ai generators to see the funny schizo images that come out. Sometimes they're coherent but usually they have fucking nothing to do with the base image. I ran out of free tokens trying to use a modify command to see what it kept generating so I didn't get to test everything I wanted to but I'm broke as shit and can't afford the subscription fee for access to more tokens, and I can't code for shit because yeah, shit never lined up in my life.


Also this going to lead to a blatant grab at abusing auto-copyright flag shit so any amount of silence in a video can be monetized by the company that owns this album. Horrible.
 
Last edited:
Meta downloaded a zillion books breaking copyright to train their AI and were Scot free. Aaron Schwartz was locked up for downloading a tiny fraction of that and killed himself (maybe.)
If they are using copyrighted work to train models that will bet them vast profit, or allow them to do nefarious shit, they can pay like us plebs do.
Radiohead were fine with letting people down load in/rainbows for free, and aren’t the biggest fans of record companies, but that was their choice.
 
Oh, sure, it's AI that's killing pop music...

Someone I once met has been faffing about with music production tools for over a decade, and I can flatly state that there are two applications of AI in music production: splitting a full track into stems, and automating EQ bands. The former makes creating clean samples a breeze, the second speeds up a tedious chore you have do anyway as a matter of course over and over and over again.

Outside of those two things, absolutely every "AI Enhanced!!!!" label is attached to snakeoil that actively hinders you, all of the "AI Deep Analysis!!!!" software is bullshit, just complete and total garbage, and every single synth that claims to somehow have AI going on under the hood sounds like freeware without the cheerful charm.

It's all bullshit, all of it. I had high hopes there would be a button to generate an authentic vamp and turnaround - something as basic bitch as 12 bar blues - that sounded less jittery than the existing brute force random MIDI approach. Nope, AI can't do rythmn.

You want an AI motif/riff generator? Here's the brand new always-online Fuck You app, shove it right up your ass, it's fucking useless, go fuck yourself with it, and also give us $80 for the privilege of finding out. You fucking dumbass, you think the thing that has eluded analysis by philosophers, theologians, musicians and mathematicians for centuries is just going to magically happen now computers are involved?

If AI can't keep time, and it can't extract a melody more complicated than coloring 4/8/16 randomly, how is it an improvement on existing brute force MIDI math generators we've had for ages? That's rhetorical, it's not. The lifeless muzak generators masquerading as bleeding edge AI Full Song apps are so safe and squeaky clean, so boring, so limited in variation and dynamic range that they make you appreciate the brute force approach for at least having the capability of coloring outside of the lines by accident once in a while.

AI is not a credible threat to employees in a production studio, let alone to musicians. This lame protest is all about vampiric copyright assertion, one of the things that actively killed mass commercial pop music on the vine.
 
Last edited:
Kate Bush is the only one I can really understand being upset about AI. She is extremely protective of her work and she has every right to be. (Also I feel like a lot of her music would be difficult to generate in AI because of how complex it is. Like you're in the key of G and suddenly you're in the key of Q?)
Speaking of Jamiroquai what's Jay Kay been up to?
 
Meta downloaded a zillion books breaking copyright to train their AI and were Scot free.
It's being litigated right now:

TorrentFreak: Meta Says it Made Sure Not to Seed Any Pirated Books (archive)
Last month, the authors filed an amended complaint which added these BitTorrent-related allegations to their existing claims. The plaintiffs pointed out that BitTorrent users typically upload content to third parties and suggest that Meta did the same here.

“Meta downloaded millions of pirated books from LibGen through the bit torrent protocol using a platform called LibTorrent. Internally, Meta acknowledged that using this protocol was legally problematic,” the third amended complaint (TAC) noted.

“By downloading through the bit torrent protocol, Meta knew it was facilitating further copyright infringement by acting as a distribution point for other users of pirated books.”

The amended complaint lists three specific claims against Meta. In addition to direct copyright infringement, the authors also accuse the company of removing copyright management information, as well as violating California’s Computer Data Access and Fraud Act (CDAFA).
 
AI is not a credible threat to employees in a production studio, let alone to musicians
Current iterations of it are not a threat to much human creativity IMO. You can smell it on written work. You can tell images it’s created. It’s quite samey.
AI could not create wuthering heights, nor could it create OK computer. It’s not even very good for translation outside the basics. It’s fine when you’re trying to translate a new article. It doesn’t deal well with idiom, or medical/scientific stuff in translation, which surprised me, I thought it’d be much better at that.
It IS good at pattern recognition diagnostics in specific settings. It is good at image analysis in diagnostic settings. I think AI is great for some niche applications (no idea about production, sadly not a world I work in but I can imagine it being good for the technical dull processes.)
Maybe future iterations will be better, but what we have now is quite disappointing overall.
I have no love for meta, any spanner in the works thrills my little Luddite soul
 
Many years ago, Mysongbook.com, the most popular website to offer Guitar, Bass, Drum and Piano tablatures, was shut down due to a law passing saying that guitar tabs, even those made for free by people that weren't always accurate, was infringing on copyright.
I lost access to millions of songs, posted free on a website, because some cunt decided I was stealing. Luckily, someone released all of the files as a torrent and I got them anyway.

TL;DR - copyright laws are retarded and I can't wait for the day when they're deemed as retarded and ended.
That's a little different

You weren't stealing the song exactly...just like a book, or source code for software, written music has copyright too

The songwriter, or the creator of any art has the right to decide if it can be published, sold, etc by who

It's not really about "stealing", it's about lack of control. It's like if you sent your kid to school and then found out the teacher was fingering your daughter

Edit: I'm aware the whiners in the article are not artists, fuck them. I'm just saying I'm for copyright laws in so far as a creative control aspect, not about money
 
Hmmm...an album with nothing on it?
Silence
Music's original alternative
Roots grunge

 
There's a book I read about the history of Jamaican music from the 1950's to modern times and it's a fascinating look into what it's like to have no copyright laws. The way music developed there is really cool, except for a lot people getting kind of screwed over, the way the music itself evolved is really cool. The idea of recycling basslines and melodies was just the way of it. Entire genres were created by remixing.and rearranging those songs and to this day a lot of Jamaican music originally written in the 1950's is still being remixed and rearranged by producers all over the world. It's really cool if you're interested in that kind of thing at all. I used to kind of hate reggae and that kind of music until I learned all that and it's almost addicting tracking down the hundreds of different songs and versions made out a bassline and hearing them in the weirdest places like the fucking town theme in Earthbound which is just a remake of the Real Rock reggae rhythm. Same with every single song by the band Sublime. Nearly every one of them is just a remake of an old Jamaican song.
What's the name of the book?

Every reggaeton use the same drum beat pattern. its from a song called Dem Bow.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Nitro!
What's the name of the book?
I'm pretty sure it's this one but I could be wrong. The author's name looks familiar and the summary sounds correct but I'm not entirely sure. I read it over 10 years ago. I found it online somewhere for free. I remember it got into the politics of Jamaica a fair bit as well which pretty fascinating. I didn't know a lot about the country before that.
Every reggaeton use the same drum beat pattern. its from a song called Dem Bow.
So it's pretty much reggaeton's Amen Break? I never really got into reggaeton very much. It's one of the reggae subgenres I don't really like so much. I like a few songs with that beat but I'm more into the rub-a-dub style and the reggae that developed in the UK and Europe. During the 2010s there was a huge reggae scene over there. They really leaned into the oldschool 70's and 80's styles and mixed it with harder bass sounds and digital and techno sounds. I came to appreciate how unwoke and no fucks given about progressive bullshit the entire genre happens to be during a time when all that shit started being pushed everywhere. None of those artists seemed to give the slightest shit about it and only cared about making music.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: tehpope
So you've released a dumb protest album anyone can replicate by turning on a pair of noise cancelling headphones and just sitting there? Well damn, I'm convinced.

As has been said, AI poses almost no threat to these people or their music exec handlers. It can pop out a samey track, but it's pretty much useless for anything but automating sliders and button presses. I've screwed around with a few of them, and using them as composition tools is very underwhelming. At least this time the album isn't full of lame protest songs, that's a plus in my book anyway.
 
Back