Artificiële Intelligentie & Recht
Innovation, Quantum-AI Technology & Law

Blog over Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum, Deep Learning, Blockchain en Big Data Law

Blog over juridische, sociale, ethische en policy aspecten van Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum Computing, Sensing & Communication, Augmented Reality en Robotica, Big Data Wetgeving en Machine Learning Regelgeving. Kennisartikelen inzake de EU AI Act, de Data Governance Act, cloud computing, algoritmes, privacy, virtual reality, blockchain, robotlaw, smart contracts, informatierecht, ICT contracten, online platforms, apps en tools. Europese regels, auteursrecht, chipsrecht, databankrechten en juridische diensten AI recht.

Berichten met de tag EU AI Act
Music Law and Artificial Intelligence: From Cloned Artists to AI-Generated Works
Music Law and Artificial Intelligence: From Cloned Artists to AI-Generated Works

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in the music industry is sparking a revolution, profoundly changing how music is created. This development raises complex legal questions concerning AI and copyright, including related rights. How can we protect the creative rights of artists and composers while simultaneously allowing room for technological innovation? In this comprehensive yet accessible legal overview, we explore key issues regarding AI and music. These include whether AI can legally train on copyrighted materials without consent, TDM exceptions, how various rights organizations (such as Buma/Stemra and Sena) approach AI, the status of AI-generated musical works, the threshold of human creativity required, protection against AI voice cloning via privacy laws and moral rights, contractual implications, new obligations under the EU AI Act, differences between European and American law, and ongoing lawsuits. This article is tailored for artists, composers, music publishers, labels, voice actors, producers, and AI companies seeking clarity on their legal standing.

AI Training on Protected Music and Video Materials: Legal Framework and Debate

Can an AI model in the Netherlands and the EU train on copyrighted material (such as music or video) without permission from the rights holders? Generally, using protected material beyond private use or citation requires permission. Scraping or using data for AI training without permission is typically considered infringement unless a specific legal exception applies.

Buma/Stemra’s Opt-Out Policy

In the Netherlands, Buma/Stemra explicitly uses its opt-out rights, requiring prior consent for TDM on its repertoire, thus ensuring fair compensation for composers and lyricists.

EU AI Act: Transparency Obligations and System Monitoring

The EU AI Act, effective from August 2025, introduces important transparency requirements, obliging generative AI model developers to:

• Disclose training data used, including copyrighted music or texts.

• Maintain policies ensuring compliance with EU copyright law.

• Respect explicit opt-out signals from rights holders during training.

The Act doesn't prohibit using protected material for training outright but enforces transparency and compliance through oversight and penalties.

Composition, Lyrics, and Master Recordings: Different Rights Regimes

Music rights in the Netherlands broadly split into:

• Copyright: Protects compositions and lyrics, managed by organizations like Buma/Stemra.

• Neighboring Rights: Protect recordings and performances, managed by Sena.

AI-Generated Compositions and Lyrics

Completely AI-generated works often fail to meet traditional copyright criteria, as human creativity is essential.

Neighboring Rights

It remains uncertain whether AI-generated performances and recordings attract neighboring rights, as these typically rely on human involvement.

Copyright Status of AI-Generated Music

In the U.S., fully AI-generated works explicitly do not receive copyright protection. While Europe hasn't clarified explicitly, the prevailing legal view aligns with this stance—AI-generated works likely fall into the public domain unless there's significant human creativity involved.

Hybrid Creations

Music combining human and AI input may qualify for copyright protection depending on the human creative contribution's significance.

AI Voice Cloning: Personality Rights and Privacy

AI voice cloning technology poses challenges regarding personal rights and privacy. Artists may invoke:

• Privacy rights under EU law (Article 8 ECHR).

• Personality rights.

• Potential trademark and image rights analogously.

The EU AI Act mandates transparency in AI-generated content, aiming to mitigate unauthorized use and deepfake concerns.

Music Contracts in the AI Era

Existing music contracts require updates addressing AI-specific matters:

• Explicit licensing terms for AI training.

• Ownership clarity of AI-generated content.

• Liability assignment for copyright infringements involving AI.

Conclusion: Balancing Innovation and Rights—Be Prepared

The intersection of AI and music law presents both opportunities and challenges. Stakeholders should proactively:

• Clearly define rights in AI-generated music contractually and update existing music contracts.

• Specify permissions (licenses) and restrictions (opt-out) regarding AI training explicitly.

• Seek specialized music & AI legal advice to navigate evolving regulations.

By strategically addressing these issues, artists, companies, and AI developers can legally and effectively harness AI innovations, maintaining both creative and commercial control.

Meer lezen
Artificial Intelligence, Intellectual Property, Machine Learning, Licenties, Naburige rechten, Privacywetgeving, Entertainment en Kunst, EthicsMauritz KopMusic Law, AI, Privacy, Copyrights, Neighbouring Rights, AI Generated Works, Voice-Cloning, Buma/Stemra, Sena, Opt-out, Music Contracts, EU AI Act, Licensing, Privacy Laws, Intellectual Property, Mauritz Kop
Mauritz Kop calls for a Quantum Governance Act at the University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Law
Mauritz Kop calls for a Quantum Governance Act at the University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Law

Much enjoyed giving a lecture titled ‘Quantum-ELSPI: A Call for a Quantum Governance Act’ on Thursday June 9, 2022 at the University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Law. This was an internal CeBiL event that took place before The Quantum Future symposium, organized by the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and its newly established Committee for Quantum Information and Quantum Computing, together with the Niels Bohr Institute’s Quantum Life Centre.

EU Quantum Governance Act

With its own Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics in which physical phenomena must be observed and measured to exist, the University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Law was the perfect place to propose an outline for a novel Quantum Governance Act on a European level, fostering open innovation while putting targeted, technology and industry specific risk based controls in place. The EU Quantum Act should jointly optimize advancing quantum technology (investment and innovation) with safeguaring quantum technology, society and humankind (guardrails, standards, values, IP protection and national security). For example, it could contain a product safety regime as found in the EU AI Act, combined with pro-innovation mechanisms as found in the US CHIPS Act. In addition, I connected regulating quantum to regulating general purpose technologies (GPT) like artificial intelligence (AI), but also to nanotechnology, biotechnology, semiconductors, and last not least to managing dual use fissionable materials such as nuclear isotopes and nuclear weapons, utilizing export and intellectual property controls.

The Law of Quantum: Quantum Regulatory Frameworks

The Quantum & Law lecture gave an overview of work done over the past 3 years on quantum regulatory frameworks, incentive and rewards systems, competition law, beyond intellectual property innovation law, ethics, national security policy, standardization, technology impact assessment, benchmarking and certification published or forthcoming in high impact journals at both sides of the Atlantic. My talk ended with discussing the latest research findings pertaining to the Law of Quantum, and Quantum-ELSPI academic disciplines. Thanks to the participants for their inspiring questions and comments!

Panel Debate about the Quantum Future at the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences

The brilliant lectures on atoms, photons, qubits, the nature of quantum information, the history of quantum physics, and current research into quantum computer paradigms -including combatting decoherence on both software and hardware levels- at The Quantum Future symposium where highly enjoyable. This fascinating program ended with a panel debate on how quantum technology will change our society, at the beautiful building of the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences, in attendance of fellow jurists Nicholson Price II, Louise C. Druedahl, Marcelo Corrales Compagnucci, and Agnieszka Radziwon.

Surfing the Waves of the Second Quantum Revolution

The panel debate at the Academy -superbly moderated by Nanna Bonde Thylstrup- gave a true, almost symptomatic picture of the various stakeholders' viewpoints and positions. But we are learning to speak each other's language better and better, a crucial and exciting step when it comes to balancing the societal impact of our mystical family of quantum technologies. Surfing the waves of the second quantum revolution requires building bridges between disciplines, beyond traditional research silos. Bringing together the humanities, social and natural sciences to spur sustainable innovation driven by a golden triangle of academia, government and industry is essential.

Thank you to Professor Timo Minssen and his team at CeBiL for the kind invite. https://jura.ku.dk/cebil/

Meer lezen
Ethics, Quantum Computing, Quantum ELSPI, Quantum TechnologyMauritz KopQuantum Act, Quantum Governance, Quantum-ELSPI, University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Law, Quantum Computing, EU AI Act, US CHIPS Act, Quantum & Law, Law & Ethics of Quantum, Quantum Regulatory Frameworks, Stanford Law School, Royal Danish Academy of Sciences, Timo Minssen, Mauritz Kop
Montreal World Summit AI 2022 Features Mauritz Kop Keynote on EU AI Act
Montreal World Summit AI 2022 Features Mauritz Kop Keynote on EU AI Act

Montreal, Canada – May 4, 2022 – Today, at the prestigious World Summit AI Americas held at the Palais des congrès, Mauritz Kop, TTLF Fellow at Stanford Law School and Director of AIRecht, provided a concise overview of the proposed EU Artificial Intelligence Act. He was a featured panellist in a critical discussion titled, "Does the proposed EU Artificial Intelligence Act provide a regulatory framework for AI that should be adopted globally?". The summit, themed "AI with impact: for crisis response and business continuity and recovery," brings together leading AI brains and enterprise leaders.

Mr. Kop joined fellow distinguished panellists Professor Gillian Hadfield from the University of Toronto and Dr. José-Marie Griffiths, President of Dakota State University and former NSCAI Commissioner. The session was moderated by Meredith Broadbent, Former Chairman of the U.S. International Trade Commission and Senior Adviser at CSIS.

Novel Legal Framework for AI

During the panel, Mr. Kop outlined the main points of the novel legal framework for AI presented by the European Commission on April 21, 2021. He explained that the EU AI Act sets out horizontal rules applicable to all industries for the development, commodification, and use of AI-driven products, services, and systems within the EU's territory.

A core component of the Act is its sophisticated ‘product safety framework’, which is constructed around four distinct risk categories in a "pyramid of criticality". This risk-based approach dictates that AI applications with unacceptable risks are banned, while lighter legal regimes apply to low-risk applications. As the risk level increases, so do the stringency of the rules, ranging from non-binding self-regulation and impact assessments for lower-risk systems to potentially heavy, externally audited compliance requirements throughout the lifecycle of high-risk AI systems.

EU "Trustworthy AI" Paradigm

Mr. Kop emphasized that the Act aims to codify the high standards of the EU’s "trustworthy AI" paradigm, which mandates that AI systems must be legal, ethical, and technically robust, all while respecting democratic values, human rights, and the rule of law. A crucial aspect highlighted was the requirement for market entrance and certification of High-Risk AI Systems through a mandatory CE-marking procedure. This pre-market conformity regime also extends to the machine learning training, testing, and validation datasets used by these systems. Only after a declaration of conformity is signed and the CE marking is affixed can these high-risk systems enter and be traded on the European markets.

Enforcement will be managed by a new Union-level body, the European Artificial Intelligence Board (EAIB), supported by national supervisors in each Member State, similar to the GDPR's oversight structure. Mr. Kop noted the seriousness of non-compliance, with potential fines reaching up to 6% of a company's global turnover.

Balancing regulation with innovation, the EU AI Act also introduces legal sandboxes. These are designed to provide AI developers with "breathing room" to test new inventions and foster a flourishing AI ecosystem in Europe.

Meer lezen
Artificial Intelligence, ConferenceMauritz KopWorld Summit AI, EU AI Act, Mauritz Kop, Gillian Hadfield, José-Marie Griffiths, Meredith Broadbent, Sarah Porter