Artificial Intelligence: what are the stakes for artists?

Actors and screenwriters in Hollywood in 2023, musicians and singers in the UK in early 2025… All over the world, protests by artists against AI are multiplying. In France, on the eve of the third global summit on AI held in Paris in February 2025, more than 34,000 signed an open letter demanding respect for their rights. What worries these creative professionals? That AI could use their original works without consent and without financial compensation to generate new ones. Music, visual arts, cinema, literature… Every field is affected. So, how can artists be protected from what they consider to be a ‘theft’ of their creations? 

The question of copyright 

AI can become a true accelerator of creativity for artists. But for those who use it, the question of ‘authorship’ of works arises above all. AI-generated art disrupts existing intellectual property laws. In France, as in most European countries, copyright protects the creator and their works throughout their lifetime, then grants their heirs protection for 70 years after death. But works generated by AI are not eligible, as legislation requires a ‘substantial’ human contribution: to be protected, a work must be created by one or more real people. Copyright is a European concept, while in Anglo-Saxon countries, it is copyright law that protects the work more than its creator. But in the case of a work created with the help of AI, who is the author and who holds the rights? To what extent is a work ‘original’? The line between technical assistance and autonomous creation is blurred, and the risk of confusion is very real. 

Protect without restricting 

If their work has already been ‘diluted’ into a dataset that gave rise to new creations, artists have few remedies. However, they can consult tools such as the website “Have I Been Trained?”, created by the start-up Spawning, which allows them to trace their works and find out if they were used to feed an AI algorithm. Other tools are emerging to protect works, such as software that blurs images or traps audio files as soon as an AI attempts to use them. Labels are also appearing, such as Human Authored for literary works and Not by AI, a more universal label that distinguishes content created without AI. 

Regulation and future outlook 

But given the legal uncertainties, the urgent need is to regulate AI use. Adopted in 2024 by the European Union, the AI Act requires AI developers to provide a ‘sufficiently detailed’ summary of the content used to train their models. The Act also provides for opt-out¹ clauses allowing authors to refuse the use of their creations by AI. At the AI Action Summit held in Paris in February 2025, France clearly expressed its proactive stance in favor of protecting artists. The question remains whether this ‘European model’ will carry weight against financial stakes and more liberal approaches in countries like the United States or the United Kingdom, which prioritize innovation. 

1. Opt-out is a principle of clearly expressed non-consent.