Our statement on AI and licensing

You could decide, if you are asked, to sign an agreement with your publisher to receive royalties for AI licensing. Initially, the royalty being offered may look attractive and this may ultimately be the right decision for you to make.

But there is a choice to be made. We believe that a collective solution to AI licensing and payment via ALCS would be a better choice for writers. We believe this for the following reasons:

Simplicity

Many writers have been published by multiple publishers and it would be simpler to administer your rights across different publishers through one collective organisation with vast experience administering these types of rights and payments.

Better terms

We believe that the terms negotiated through collective agreements are more likely to be beneficial for writers; we are committed to ensuring writers get a fair share, the right share.

Collaborative

A collective solution would mean that writers, visual artists and publishers are all being remunerated and would work together to dictate the terms of any licensing agreement.

Transparency

ALCS is a collecting society and as such is governed by rules which ensure that we operate within clear and transparent guidelines for the benefit of rightsholders. We are an organisation led by writers for writers, so our governance structure ensures that we keep the needs of writers at our core.

The Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA), the company who licence organisations to copy your published works, is currently working with its member organisations (including ALCS) to develop collective licensing solutions for the use of works to develop AI systems. We will be consulting with our members over the summer to find out your thoughts on proposed licensing solutions and the results of this consultation with you and other writer members will directly inform the development of these licences.

ALCS has been collecting money for writers for 47 years. We have consistently secured remuneration for writers where new technologies result in their works being used without permission: in the 1970s it was for photocopying, in the 2000s scanning and online use and in the 2020s, it’s AI. Our business is paying writers what they’re owed in a consistent, transparent and fair manner.

We’re not-for-profit, run by writers for writers and since 1977 have paid out over £700m to our members. We believe we’re the better choice for writers.

Barbara Hayes
Chief Executive, ALCS

“In May 2024, 97% of voting Society of Authors’ members collectively asserted that they do not consent to their works being used to develop generative artificial intelligence (GAI) systems without their permission, credit, or remuneration. It is a foundational principle of copyright law that before using a copyright-protected work, the user should agree terms with the rightsholder. Sometimes, however, seeking individual permission is impossible. This has been the primary contention presented by AI developers: that individual permission cannot be sought when copyright works are scraped – with or without authorisation – to develop GAI systems.

The AI race won’t stop, and we need urgently to establish mechanisms to protect creators’ rights and support the fragile ecosystem which allows them to continue to create. We support and welcome the initiative taken by ALCS and CLA to develop a solution to GAI systems’ exploitation of those rights which cannot be licensed on a case-by-case basis.”

Anna Ganley
Chief Executive, Society of Authors

Keep an eye out for our AI edition of ALCS News on 26 June, where we will launch our survey on AI licensing along with other AI content.