By AFP
March 20, 2026
Valued at 11.7 billion euros ($13.5 billion), Mistral has staked a place as Europe's challenger to the AI behemoths that have emerged in the US with valuations in the hundreds of billions. - Copyright AFP/File Lionel BONAVENTURE
Companies selling artificial intelligence models in Europe should pay a “levy” to support cultural industries, the head of French developer Mistral said Friday.
AI models are trained on vast swathes of human-generated data including text, audio and video, which has prompted complaints and legal challenges to their developers from both creators and copyright-owning companies in America and Europe.
Operators of AI models in Europe should pay “a revenue-based levy… reflecting their use of content publicly available online,” Mensch wrote in an op-ed for the Financial Times (FT) shared with AFP.
“Proceeds would flow into a central European fund dedicated to investing in new content creation, and supporting Europe’s cultural sectors,” he added.
Mistral’s external affairs chief Audrey Herblin-Stoop told AFP that the company was suggesting a levy of between 1.0 and 1.5 percent of revenues.
With most major AI developers based in the US, Mensch insisted that “this levy would apply equally to providers based abroad, creating a level playing field within the European market and ensuring that foreign AI companies also contribute when they operate here”.
Brussels’ AI regulation, adopted in 2024, requires systems to respect the EU’s copyright rules.
But the question of how to apply the law to generative AI systems remains undecided.
In exchange for paying the levy, AI developers “would gain what they urgently need: legal certainty,” Mensch wrote.
“The mechanism would shield AI providers from liability for training on materials accessible on the web,” he added — without replacing direct agreements between data owners and AI firms.
Valued at 11.7 billion euros ($13.5 billion), Mistral has staked a place as Europe’s challenger to the AI behemoths that have emerged in the US with valuations in the hundreds of billions.
Those dominant players enjoy “extremely permissive regulatory contexts on copyright,” Herblin-Stoop said.
American AI giant Anthropic nevertheless agreed in September to pay $1.5 billion to settle a class-action lawsuit by authors.
Mistral was itself accused last month of using copyrighted works including “Harry Potter” and “The Little Prince” to train its AI model, in an investigation by French media Mediapart.
The company told AFP at the time that it “respects the opt-out mechanisms and deploys safeguards” against including copyrighted material.
Nevertheless, some of the works involved are “especially popular and duplicated many times online”, making it difficult to exclude them completely from training data.
Global music market grows, calls for AI compensation: industry body
ByAFP
March 18, 2026
Taylor Swift was the biggest-selling global artist of 2025 - Copyright GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP/File Frazer Harrison
The global music industry generated $31.7 billion last year, driven by online streaming, industry body IFPI said Wednesday, as it called on the sector to ensure AI-generated content compensates musicians.
Music revenues rose 6.4 percent, marking the eleventh consecutive year of expansion, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, which represents more than 8,000 global record labels.
Streaming accounted for nearly 70 percent of annual revenue, with paid streaming subscriptions reaching 837 million subscribers worldwide.
But the IFPI warned against the increasing threat of AI-generated streams of fake content.
“Streaming fraud is theft, plain and simple,” the group said in its annual report, calling instead for technology to “support and enhance creativity, not replace it.”
AI-generated tracks regularly go viral, such as the runaway success of an AI cover of Belgian musician Stromae’s “Papaoutai” at the end of January.
According to the report, Deezer revealed that it receives more than 60,000 AI-generated tracks every day.
AI music generation platforms — such as US based Suno and Udio — argue their work is covered by the American copyright loophole of “fair use,” which does not require rights holders’ consent.
The IFPI urged policymakers to uphold copyright protections.
“Music is embracing the future, demonstrated by record company partnerships with generative AI developers who respect the rights of creators,” the group said.
Suno reached an agreement with record label Warner Music Group in November to compensate artists whose work is used to create AI-generated tracks.
Image: — © AFP
Revenues from physical formats were up, including from vinyl which grew 13.7 percent.
Asia drove the rise in vinyls and CDs, while these formats were almost non-existent in the North Africa and Middle East market, where streaming accounts for 97.5 percent of revenue.
Taylor Swift was the biggest-selling global artist of 2025, followed by Korean group Stray kids and Canadian rapper Drake.
ByAFP
March 18, 2026
Taylor Swift was the biggest-selling global artist of 2025 - Copyright GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP/File Frazer Harrison
The global music industry generated $31.7 billion last year, driven by online streaming, industry body IFPI said Wednesday, as it called on the sector to ensure AI-generated content compensates musicians.
Music revenues rose 6.4 percent, marking the eleventh consecutive year of expansion, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, which represents more than 8,000 global record labels.
Streaming accounted for nearly 70 percent of annual revenue, with paid streaming subscriptions reaching 837 million subscribers worldwide.
But the IFPI warned against the increasing threat of AI-generated streams of fake content.
“Streaming fraud is theft, plain and simple,” the group said in its annual report, calling instead for technology to “support and enhance creativity, not replace it.”
AI-generated tracks regularly go viral, such as the runaway success of an AI cover of Belgian musician Stromae’s “Papaoutai” at the end of January.
According to the report, Deezer revealed that it receives more than 60,000 AI-generated tracks every day.
AI music generation platforms — such as US based Suno and Udio — argue their work is covered by the American copyright loophole of “fair use,” which does not require rights holders’ consent.
The IFPI urged policymakers to uphold copyright protections.
“Music is embracing the future, demonstrated by record company partnerships with generative AI developers who respect the rights of creators,” the group said.
Suno reached an agreement with record label Warner Music Group in November to compensate artists whose work is used to create AI-generated tracks.
Image: — © AFP
Revenues from physical formats were up, including from vinyl which grew 13.7 percent.
Asia drove the rise in vinyls and CDs, while these formats were almost non-existent in the North Africa and Middle East market, where streaming accounts for 97.5 percent of revenue.
Taylor Swift was the biggest-selling global artist of 2025, followed by Korean group Stray kids and Canadian rapper Drake.
In Hollywood, AI’s no match for creativity, say top executives
By AFP
March 16, 2026
US filmmaker Steven Spielberg says he has never used AI in his award-winning films, and he doesn't support AI if it takes work from creatives - Copyright AFP Jean Baptiste Lacroix
Alex PIGMAN
Artificial intelligence is transforming Hollywood at a pace that has sent shockwaves through creative industries, but human creativity will always prevail, a leading executive at the cutting edge of that change told AFP.
The disruption was a dominant theme at this week’s South by Southwest conference in Austin, Texas where veteran director Steven Spielberg made clear he was drawing a line in the sand.
“I’ve never used AI on any of my films yet. We have a writer’s room. All the seats are occupied,” Spielberg said. “I am not for AI if it replaces a creative individual.”
Joshua Davies, chief innovation officer of Artlist — a Tel Aviv-based AI video platform that has most recently been positioning itself as a supplier of creative tools to filmmakers — told AFP the technology would never eclipse the human creative.
If given the choice between something made using an AI toold by a techie and a creative, “I know which one I would rather watch at the end,” said Davies, who founded video editing software company FXhome before it was acquired by Artlist in 2021.
Davies acknowledged the industry’s anxiety was not unfounded, with new video models having “struck fear in the hearts of everybody” — not just over copyright and personality infringement, but over the fundamental question of how film and television production will look in a matter of years.
“If I was bringing out an Iron Man movie in 2027, 2028 — would I be going to multiple visual effects houses, would I expect them to be utilizing AI? We’re all kind of working out our way through that,” he said.
Davies described the platform’s AI video tools as a way to “fill in the bits that you can’t shoot, or didn’t shoot, or you don’t have the budget to shoot,” rather than a wholesale substitution for going out on location.
– ‘Holy grail’ –
Yet the timing is charged. Editors, visual effects artists and other Hollywood professions have watched the rapid advance of generative AI with alarm, fearing that tools capable of producing broadcast-quality footage at a fraction of traditional costs could hollow out entire job categories.
Major studios are actively evaluating how AI can be integrated into production pipelines, foreshadowing significant workforce changes across an industry that has already endured a bruising period following the covid pandemic and writers’ and actors’ strikes of 2023.
Artlist made headlines in February when it produced a Super Bowl LX spot in under five days using its own products, at a fraction of the multi-million-dollar cost typical of Big Game advertising.
Davies was keen to push back on the narrative that the ad represented the future of production without human involvement.
That wasn’t what it was, he said. It was creatives “using the tool to get the very best out of it.”
A self-described “techie guy,” Davies said the platform’s current obsession is on giving creators nuanced control over creating or editing footage — something he described as the company’s “holy grail.”
Existing models, he said, handle simple static shots reasonably well but struggle with complex camera movements and consistent performance across multiple takes.
You can prompt an elaborate shot, but for now “you’ll get something random” that you can’t work with.
On cost, Davies cautioned against unrealistic expectations, suggesting AI would reduce production expenses significantly but not eliminate them.
Davies said his long-term hope was that AI would serve as a leveling force for independent filmmakers and content creators who currently lack the budgets to realize their ambitions.
“There are definitely YouTubers who make some of the best action work out there on no budget,” he said.
“AI will level that playing field completely — the story will be what matters.”
He struck a cautiously optimistic note on the creative industry’s direction, dismissing the most dystopian predictions.
“The idea that no one works at the end of it is the bit that doesn’t hold any water with me,” he said.
“There’s been more and more of everything, not less and less — and the cream rises to the top anyway, because the human element is what we crave.”
By AFP
March 16, 2026
US filmmaker Steven Spielberg says he has never used AI in his award-winning films, and he doesn't support AI if it takes work from creatives - Copyright AFP Jean Baptiste Lacroix
Alex PIGMAN
Artificial intelligence is transforming Hollywood at a pace that has sent shockwaves through creative industries, but human creativity will always prevail, a leading executive at the cutting edge of that change told AFP.
The disruption was a dominant theme at this week’s South by Southwest conference in Austin, Texas where veteran director Steven Spielberg made clear he was drawing a line in the sand.
“I’ve never used AI on any of my films yet. We have a writer’s room. All the seats are occupied,” Spielberg said. “I am not for AI if it replaces a creative individual.”
Joshua Davies, chief innovation officer of Artlist — a Tel Aviv-based AI video platform that has most recently been positioning itself as a supplier of creative tools to filmmakers — told AFP the technology would never eclipse the human creative.
If given the choice between something made using an AI toold by a techie and a creative, “I know which one I would rather watch at the end,” said Davies, who founded video editing software company FXhome before it was acquired by Artlist in 2021.
Davies acknowledged the industry’s anxiety was not unfounded, with new video models having “struck fear in the hearts of everybody” — not just over copyright and personality infringement, but over the fundamental question of how film and television production will look in a matter of years.
“If I was bringing out an Iron Man movie in 2027, 2028 — would I be going to multiple visual effects houses, would I expect them to be utilizing AI? We’re all kind of working out our way through that,” he said.
Davies described the platform’s AI video tools as a way to “fill in the bits that you can’t shoot, or didn’t shoot, or you don’t have the budget to shoot,” rather than a wholesale substitution for going out on location.
– ‘Holy grail’ –
Yet the timing is charged. Editors, visual effects artists and other Hollywood professions have watched the rapid advance of generative AI with alarm, fearing that tools capable of producing broadcast-quality footage at a fraction of traditional costs could hollow out entire job categories.
Major studios are actively evaluating how AI can be integrated into production pipelines, foreshadowing significant workforce changes across an industry that has already endured a bruising period following the covid pandemic and writers’ and actors’ strikes of 2023.
Artlist made headlines in February when it produced a Super Bowl LX spot in under five days using its own products, at a fraction of the multi-million-dollar cost typical of Big Game advertising.
Davies was keen to push back on the narrative that the ad represented the future of production without human involvement.
That wasn’t what it was, he said. It was creatives “using the tool to get the very best out of it.”
A self-described “techie guy,” Davies said the platform’s current obsession is on giving creators nuanced control over creating or editing footage — something he described as the company’s “holy grail.”
Existing models, he said, handle simple static shots reasonably well but struggle with complex camera movements and consistent performance across multiple takes.
You can prompt an elaborate shot, but for now “you’ll get something random” that you can’t work with.
On cost, Davies cautioned against unrealistic expectations, suggesting AI would reduce production expenses significantly but not eliminate them.
Davies said his long-term hope was that AI would serve as a leveling force for independent filmmakers and content creators who currently lack the budgets to realize their ambitions.
“There are definitely YouTubers who make some of the best action work out there on no budget,” he said.
“AI will level that playing field completely — the story will be what matters.”
He struck a cautiously optimistic note on the creative industry’s direction, dismissing the most dystopian predictions.
“The idea that no one works at the end of it is the bit that doesn’t hold any water with me,” he said.
“There’s been more and more of everything, not less and less — and the cream rises to the top anyway, because the human element is what we crave.”
No comments:
Post a Comment