The European Union was a pioneer in regulating Artificial Intelligence with a first law to define the scope of this technology, in one of the legislative files with the most negotiation hours remembered in Brussels. Two years after its approval, the continent now faces the challenge of responding to the new challenges posed by these services, especially for the cultural sector, which during the early stages of the debate had remained relatively on the sidelines of community negotiations.
The sector has been warning for some time about two major risks derived from the advancement of generative tools. On the one hand, the gradual disappearance of the human dimension in the creation of cultural content produced by algorithms. On the other, the threat to the very economic viability of the European creative ecosystem. In fact, the Spanish government recently submitted a document to the Council of the European Union table in which it defined the current situation as an "existential risk" for society and for community democracy due to how these types of technologies blur the "lines between truth and falsehood," altering "the perception of discourses and their authors" and even modifying "cognitive faculties."
The concern is not insignificant. In Brussels, it is already assumed that the debate on Artificial Intelligence is no longer exclusively technological but has become a structural discussion about cultural sovereignty, copyright, and the internal market. The growing fear in some European institutions is that the current training model for generative systems will end up eroding the economic value of human creation and consolidate an ecosystem dominated by a small group of large technology companies capable of massively absorbing protected content.
Featured story
The EU prepares a review of copyright after Spain's offensive for generative AI
5 minutes
One of the names that best knows the European regulatory architecture in this matter is that of the former Spanish MEP Ignacio García del Blanco, the only Spanish representative who directly participated in the negotiations of the European Artificial Intelligence regulation. The former parliamentarian defines that regulation as a "milestone", although he acknowledges that the final text "contains a more instrumental clause than a real specific solution to the problems."
The clash between innovation and copyright
The reflection is not accidental. Although the European AI regulation introduced transparency obligations for certain generative models and set principles for the use of protected content, many players in the sector consider that the text was born already conditioned by the speed of technological evolution. Since then, the ability of generative models to produce texts, images, videos, music, or voice imitations has multiplied the pressure on the European regulatory framework.
Currently, the European Commission maintains an open consultation process for interested parties to submit reform proposals on copyright regulations with the aim of protecting them against new technological developments. Brussels is studying specific measures to modernize the current legislative framework and move towards a "fairer" market for rights holders, creators, and the cultural industry as a whole.
Among the alternatives already being debated in European regulatory circles is the possibility of implementing automated licensing systems using blockchain technologies. The objective would be to facilitate the relationship between rights holders and companies requesting authorization to use protected content in Artificial Intelligence training processes.
García del Blanco believes that these types of tools can become a useful mechanism for organizing a market that currently operates under enormous asymmetries. "The situation is at a point where there is so much imbalance that immediate measures are needed," he explains in conversation with Demócrata, while defending the need to build regulatory instruments with a permanent vocation.
The lawyer and former European legislator insists that the problem cannot be analyzed solely from the perspective of large American technology companies, but that the situation of European startups and small developers must also be taken into account. "We have to move towards flexible solutions that allow us to consider the capacity of all actors. It is not the same to be a large company with a huge volume of accumulated rights as it is to be a small holder," he points out.
In that balance lies a good part of the European challenge. Brussels wants to avoid excessively rigid regulation ending up stifling European digital innovation in the midst of a global race for AI. However, at the same time, there is growing political and cultural pressure to prevent the European creative economy from being subordinated to business models built on the massive use of protected content.
From “opt out” to “opt in”
What is detected, according to García del Blanco, is that “there is a huge imbalance between tech companies and the cultural sector”. The former MEP suggests that the system evolve towards a model in which “the rights holder has complete control of their work”, meaning that content can only be used if there is prior express authorization.
The proposal represents a substantial change from the scheme initially defended by the European Commission, based on the well-known “opt out” system, whereby creators had to expressly state their refusal for their content to be used. The model that is now gaining traction in certain regulatory sectors involves moving towards an effective “opt in” system, where the author's prior consent becomes an indispensable condition.
Del Blanco summarizes it graphically: “The final word must belong to the author, the creator, and the performer”, who should also be able to set “a fair price for their own work”. Although he immediately acknowledges the technical and legal difficulties of implementing a model of these characteristics in a globalized digital environment. “It’s easier said than done,” he admits.
Featured story
Spain will ask the EU to review copyright in the face of the advance of generative AI
4 minutes
Although, at first, the public consultation launched by the European Commission aims to explore an update of the 2019 directive on copyright in the digital single market, the Community executive no longer rules out the possibility of promoting a specific legislative initiative on copyright and Artificial Intelligence.
In Brussels, there is a growing feeling that the pace of technological development has outstripped some of the forecasts considered when the current regulatory framework was approved. Some Community officials privately acknowledge that certain provisions have quickly become outdated due to the exponential expansion of foundational models and the sophistication of generative tools.
The battle for European cultural sovereignty
In parallel, García del Blanco has promoted a Working Group of Experts tasked with developing a roadmap on creation rights and access to culture in new digital environments. The document will be presented this same week in Madrid during a congress that will bring together more than a hundred participants, including institutional leaders, academic experts, creators, and representatives of the cultural industry.
The objective of the forum is to try to build a more cohesive European position around the protection of cultural creation against the rise of generative Artificial Intelligence. A particularly sensitive issue for countries like Spain, France, or Italy, where the economic and symbolic weight of cultural industries maintains strategic relevance.
When asked about possible economic compensation for creators, the former European legislator explains that the challenge is to “establish a plural system”, in which large rights holders have the capacity to negotiate directly without necessarily depending on intermediaries or large management associations.
“We must differentiate between small entrepreneurs or small projects and very large digital developers,” he maintains. “The problem has not been generated by the small ones; it has been generated massively by the very large ones, who are also the ones setting the conditions and the pace of the market,” he adds.
Underlying this, the discussion opened in Brussels is increasingly connected with the idea of European cultural sovereignty. In certain community sectors, the thesis is beginning to consolidate that Europe must not only protect its technological autonomy but also preserve its cultural heritage against dynamics of digital concentration that could end up weakening the continental creative ecosystem.
The issue affects writers, musicians, and filmmakers as well as media outlets, publishers, visual artists, and audiovisual producers. Many of them consider that the use of their content to train AI systems has been carried out until now without effective authorization mechanisms or proportional economic compensation. In this context, Member States still have some room for maneuver. Spain, for example, has a more sophisticated and protective development of the European directive on copyright than many of its neighboring countries, according to García del Blanco. However, the fact that the last major regulatory revision took place almost a decade ago highlights the gap between current legislation and the present technological reality.
The risk of dismantling the European model
The debate also comes at a particularly delicate moment for the European digital strategy. This very month, the European Parliament and the Council reached a preliminary agreement on the so-called “digital omnibus”, a legislative revision aimed at simplifying certain obligations regarding Artificial Intelligence and facilitating business development.
Although the former MEP views some of the proposed modifications positively—such as those related to data access for detecting biases or strengthening the role of the European Artificial Intelligence Office—he also warns of the risks of partially dismantling the balance achieved after years of negotiation.
Featured story
What changes with the new EU AI law: relief for companies and new digital prohibitions
7 minutes
In his opinion, certain modifications could end up weakening the original architecture of the European AI regulation and eroding the regulatory leadership position that the Union had managed to consolidate internationally. “We would be making a big mistake if we were to start amending ourselves now,” he concludes.
The statement summarizes much of the dilemma facing Brussels today: how to combine innovation, competitiveness, and technological development without renouncing the protection of fundamental rights, cultural creation, and European strategic autonomy. Because behind the legal discussion on licenses, algorithms, and foundational models, a much broader political battle is also being fought: who will control the economic and cultural value of intellectual production in the new digital economy.