Creators reject the draft of the EU good practices code: “It is totally unacceptable”

A coalition of authors, performers, artists and other rights holders in the cultural and creative sectors of the European Union (EU) has made public a joint declaration to reject the third draft of the Code of Good Practices for the Artificial Intelligence of General Purpose (GPAI, for its acronym in English), of the Artificial Intelligence Law of the European Union (EU), which they consider “totally inacceptable.”

“The third draft of the GPAI Progress Code Socava The objectives of the AI ​​Law, contravenes the legislation of the European Union (EU) and ignores the intention of the EU legislator: we cannot support it,” they maintain in the document collected by Europa Press.

In the text, the coalition emphasizes that a “key” objective of the AI ​​law is to provide the authors, artists, interpreters of works of art and other holders of “tools to exercise and assert their rights, demanding from the suppliers of the general use (IAG) that implement measures to fulfill the EU legislation in the field of author and provide a sufficiently detailed summary of the content of the content. training”.

“The EU legislator recognized this as a fundamental means of supporting the development of AI in Europe and protecting the EU creative sectors that drive their cultural and economic landscape,” they point out.

However, for the coalition, the third draft of the Code of Good Practices of the IAUG represents “an additional step back for the achievement of this objective”. “Create legal uncertainty, Malinter pre -the EU legislation regarding copyright and cuts the obligations established in the law of AI itself,” he adds.

It also believes that “instead of providing a solid framework for compliance, it puts the bar so low that it does not provide any significant help so that the authors, interpreters of works of art and other rights holders exercise and assert their rights.” “And what is more essential: I would not guarantee that IAUG suppliers comply with the legislation on the copyright or the law of the EU,” he emphasizes.

As indicated, the “intention” of the EU’s law was to make possible the development of a “responsible and ensure that cultural and creative sectors can continue to grow in all European territories.” “Absolutely against this, the third draft of the Code of Good Practices of the IAUG establishes an implementation rule that undermines the objectives of the AI ​​Law, contravene the right of the EU and ignores the intention of the EU legislator,” criticizes.

“The third draft is consequently unacceptable. We cannot support the Code of Good Practices of the IAUG in its current version. Not having any code would be better than the third draft, which contains fundamental defects,” he concludes.