Tech firms should pay the creators whose work they use | Letter
It could raise up to £300m a year, providing UK creators with additional income, write Barbara Hayes , Tayyiba Nasser , Christian Zimmermann and Paul Seheult Anthropic’s proposal ( AI firm Anthropic to commit 5% of shares to fund for ‘public good’, 19 October ) raises an important question: who should benefit from technological progress? Before pledging money for the public good, AI companies such as Anthropic should first pay the creators whose work they use. Device manufacturers have a separate responsibility under the same principle: creators should share in the value their work generates.
It could raise up to £300m a year, providing UK creators with additional income, write Barbara Hayes , Tayyiba Nasser , Christian Zimmermann and Paul Seheult
Anthropic’s proposal ( AI firm Anthropic to commit 5% of shares to fund for ‘public good’, 19 October ) raises an important question: who should benefit from technological progress? Before pledging money for the public good, AI companies such as Anthropic should first pay the creators whose work they use.
Device manufacturers have a separate responsibility under the same principle: creators should share in the value their work generates. Smartphones , computers and other devices enable creative work to be copied and stored, yet UK creators receive no private-copying payments, unlike their counterparts in more than 40 other countries.
The proposed Smart Fund would require manufacturers and importers to make modest contributions on devices used to copy or store creative work. It could raise up to £300m a year, providing creators with additional income and supporting skills, cultural programmes and affordable workspaces.
