Protecting copyright for Dutch artists and songwriters in the AI era

The rise of AI technologies such as Udio and Suno, which clone the voices and lyrics of Dutch artists and songwriters without permission, is causing considerable unrest in the Dutch music industry. These practices raise serious questions about the protection of copyright: what can artists and songwriters do about it?

What do Udio and Suno do?

According to research by AD, AI music programmes such as Suno and Udio use copyright-protected material by Dutch artists to train their AI tools. The technology allows people to produce a track using these artists’ voices in only thirty seconds, without the artists having given permission or receiving any payment. Despite promises by Udio to remove the unlawful songs, that appears not to have happened.

Copyright exists precisely so that someone else cannot simply take the credit for something you made. Put more simply, the artist or songwriter has control over their work. That means they have the exclusive right to determine who may use the work, in what way and for how long. Go around the artist or songwriter and you infringe. And if you have obtained access to the works of the artist or songwriter unlawfully, then feed those works into AI systems and run off with what comes out, you infringe.

What can you do about your voice or lyrics being used by AI?

The first option, and immediately the least satisfying, is to go on waiting for adequate legislation. At present Dutch law, and the rules on copyright contracts in the Dutch Copyright Act in particular, offers little to work with. Yes, the artist or songwriter can of course tell Udio and Suno that they have not given permission for the use of their voice or lyrics, but without legislation clearly setting out the responsibilities of AI tools such as Udio and Suno, those companies will feel less compelled to act.

At the moment national implementing legislation for the Digital Services Act (DSA) is in the pipeline, and at the end of May this year the European AI Act will be definitively adopted in Brussels. The AI Act will then take effect in phases over a period of three years. Under it, AI systems will have to comply with additional rules, such as demonstrating how they respect copyright.

The second option is something that already seems to be happening in the United States, namely that artists and songwriters enter into a commercial collaboration with AI providers. The artists and songwriters in effect give permission for the use of their voice and lyrics, but with payment in return.

The third option is something I would recommend doing in any event. The artist or songwriter determines what happens with their creations. It is therefore essential to make sound arrangements about the use of those creations and the conditions attached to it. With AI tools in mind it is advisable, for instance, to make an express reservation of rights that specifically prohibits the use of voice and lyrics in AI tools.

The fourth option is more of a last resort: going to court. Given the complexity of the current legislation and the slow pace of its implementation, going to court may be necessary in order to enforce existing rights.

Need legal advice?

If, as an artist or songwriter, you need support or would like to talk further about how best to protect your creative rights in this new AI era, you are of course welcome to get in touch with us.