The Society of Authors (SoA) has unveiled concerning findings from a survey conducted in January 2024, which shed light on the growing impact of generative artificial intelligence (AI) on creative careers. The survey, which received nearly 800 responses from the SoA’s 12,500 members and other authors, highlights the urgent need for ethical development of AI technologies that operate within the bounds of copyright laws.
While some creators are voluntarily utilizing generative AI as a tool in their work, others, particularly translators and illustrators, are being pressured to incorporate it by publishers and commissioning organizations. Approximately one in five respondents (22%) reported using generative AI in their work, including 12% of illustrators, 37% of translators, 20% of fiction writers, and around 25% of non-fiction writers. Notably, around 31% of illustrators and writers indicated using generative AI for brainstorming ideas, while 8% of translators and 5% of illustrators revealed they have used it at the request of their publisher or commissioning body.
Alarmingly, a quarter of illustrators (26%) and over a third of translators (36%) have already lost work due to these AI technologies.
The survey findings also shed light on the detrimental impact of generative AI on creators’ livelihoods. Alarmingly, a quarter of illustrators (26%) and over a third of translators (36%) have already lost work due to these AI technologies. Furthermore, over a third of illustrators (37%) and more than four in ten translators (43%) reported a decrease in the value of their work’s income because of generative AI.
The concerns extend to future earnings, with almost two-thirds of fiction writers (65%) and over half of non-fiction writers (57%) believing that generative AI will negatively impact their future income from creative work. This sentiment is shared by over three-quarters of translators (77%) and illustrators (78%).
Moreover, more than eight in ten respondents (86%) expressed concerns about their style, voice, and likeness being mimicked or reproduced in generative AI output, while an equal proportion (86%) voiced concerns that the use of generative AI devalues human-made creative work.
Some respondents raised apprehensions that generative AI could potentially replace human creators, particularly in areas like copywriting and content creation, leading to a decline in quality and diversity within the creative industries. Even those respondents who were more optimistic about the potential ethical use of generative AI systems, such as improving efficiency and accessibility, reiterated that ethical concerns remain a primary reason to exercise caution in their use at this stage.
The survey revealed an almost unanimous consensus among respondents regarding the need for regulation of generative AI. Respondents overwhelmingly called for measures to ensure that consent is sought from copyright holders before their work is used to develop these systems, that credit and compensation are provided, and that the outputs of generative AI systems are clearly labeled as such.
Specifically, almost all respondents (94%) want credit and compensation, and to be asked for consent (95%) when their work is used to develop generative AI systems or to enable AI-generated output. Additionally, almost all respondents (95%) urged the government to introduce safeguards and regulations to ensure compliance with these measures of consent, compensation, and transparency.
In a clear message to publishers and other organizations about the importance of transparency in all uses of AI software, the overwhelming majority of respondents (over nine in ten) believed that publishers and other organizations should prominently state when generative AI has been used to assist with audio, video, covers and illustrations, decision-making, editing, and translation.
Respondents also expressed ethical concerns about generative AI systems, highlighting biases and inaccuracies in AI-generated content, worries about copyright infringement, misuse of personal data, and the exploitation of fellow creators’ works without consent or remuneration. Almost all respondents (97%) believed that consumers deserve transparency and should be made aware when generative AI systems have generated all or a portion of what they are reading, viewing, or hearing.
In response to these findings, the SoA emphasized the urgent need for action and commitment to measures involving consent, remuneration, and transparency, with an unambiguous message to developers, government, and industry to respect the rights of human creators when developing, using, and regulating these tools.
The developers of generative AI systems must commit to transparency and ethical development, engaging with rightsholders – collectively and individually – about consent, credit, and remuneration. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for government regulation of generative AI systems to ensure they are developed and used ethically and lawfully, with requirements for transparency, consent, credit, labeling, and remuneration.
The government needs to uphold copyright laws in the UK and strengthen enforcement mechanisms. The SoA reiterates its call for AI developers to engage with the creative industries to develop models for remunerating authors for past infringement and future use, including through collective licensing models.
Publishing and the creative industries must commit to protecting human creativity and authorship. The SoA urges all its members to vote in the upcoming Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) on May 2, 2024, to assert that they do not consent to the use of their works to develop AI systems.
Commenting on the survey findings, Nicola Solomon, the outgoing Chief Executive of the SoA and Chair of the Creators’ Rights Alliance, said:
“The generative AI landscape has evolved rapidly. Two years ago, these were niche systems, but they have quickly become global, mass-market products. We raised concerns then about the possible future impact on creative careers. Today, that impact is already felt acutely by more and more creators – from translators and illustrators to journalists and educational writers. No one expects generative AI to be un-invented, and we all know its potential to be a powerful and useful tool. But it is not too late to ensure that it is developed and used ethically and within existing copyright frameworks. Once the world moves beyond the wow factor of each new system release, generative AI must remain a tool to support and enhance human-made creative work, not a cheap alternative to replace it.”
The survey findings underscore the growing concerns within the creative community about the impact of generative AI on their livelihoods and the urgent need for ethical development, regulation, and transparency from developers, government, and industry. As these technologies continue to evolve, striking a balance between innovation and protecting the rights and interests of human creators remains a critical challenge.
