The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) in the last few years provides companies and individuals with huge opportunities and makes life easier. Especially in the cultural sector, the use of AI has seen such progress that it has been instrumental in unlocking new creative fields. This is thanks to a large part of the creators whose works are actually making up the basic raw material for AI generated music. The creators of such basic raw material have, however, not been remunerated for it. This has to change.
Copyright protection offers incentives for creators to make something new and thus guarantees cultural progress. The latest technological developments in the AI sector go hand in hand with the undermining of copyright-related basic principles. Incentives to create something are suspended and the creative sector is in danger of falling out of balance. The task at hand is to prevent this.
The Federal Council has presented an “overview of regulatory approaches to AI” on 12 February 2025 – questions to the most pressing copyright-related matters remain, however, unanswered in the document. The Federal Council may recognise the fact that generative AI systems are often trained with works protected by copyright. It does, however, not comment on the issue of whether this training is permitted or not. At least the extent to which the interest of rightsholders could be taken into account in other ways is to be examined in case training was to be permitted under copyright law. In the meantime, providers of generative AI systems continue to use copyright-protected works without asking creators for permission or paying them.
Fair conditions for cultural creations called for
As early as on 20 December 2024, Petra Gössi (FDP), Member of the Council of States, has filed a motion with the title “Better protection of intellectual property against AI misuse”. In it, the Federal Council is tasked to comprehensively protect works and services under copyright when they are used by AI providers.
To do this, Ms Gössi makes three demands: First, it is mandatory that rightsholders give their consent whenever their works and services are used for training generative AI. Second, AI providers must not be able to call upon exceptions in copyright law (so-called restrictions). Third, Swiss law must be applicable and Swiss courts must have jurisdiction if AI systems are offered in Switzerland. The Federal Council had recommended to accept the motion on 19 February 2025 and the Council of States followed this recommendation on 20 March 2025. The motion is now referred to the National Council and if it is carried, to the Federal Council.
Following their joint meeting on 17 March 2025, the five Swiss collective management organisations SUISA, Swissperform, SSA, Suissimage and ProLitteris recommended in a letter to the Council of States that the motion Gössi should be supported as it demanded detailed and urgently needed specifications in copyright law and thus created fair conditions for creative acts.
