Our survey on artificial intelligence

Between June and August this year, we surveyed our members on their feelings towards artificial intelligence and two potential licensing options that would enable ALCS to compensate writers when their works were used. The survey was completed by 13,574 members and revealed that authors are aligned with the key themes of choice, recognition, transparency, and remuneration outlined in our Principles for AI and Authors.

Choice 

The report highlights that authors are not completely opposed to their works being used to train AI models – but only if they received fair compensation, were appropriately credited, or their permission was asked. 

Findings include:  

• 91% of writers feel that they should be asked for permission for their works to be used to train AI. 

• 96% of writers would want remuneration if their works have been used to train AI. 

• 87% want to be credited when their works are used to train AI. 

• 92% of respondents said that they would want to receive compensation for any historic use of their work to train AI. 

Transparency 

The lack of clarity around AI systems is a further issue for authors. Alongside the report finding that 77% of authors do not know if their work has been used to train AI models, it further found that: 

• 71% of the writers surveyed were concerned about their works being used to train AI. 

• 71% of writers or their representatives were concerned about AI platforms ‘copying or mimicking’ their style of their writing. 

Collective Licensing 

Respondents were supportive of finding a licensing agreement that would enable them to benefit from the use of their works to train AI systems: 

• 81% said that they would be happy to support a licence if ALCS was able to secure one. 

• 72% of members would expect to have the ability to opt-out of any licensing schemes that are put in place.