Joint letter to the European Parliament’s CULT Committee on the upcoming own-initiative report “Cultural and creative sectors in the age of AI”

Brussels, 2 March 2026

Dear Mr. Zoltán Tarr,

Dear Member of the Culture and Education (CULT) Committee,

We are writing to you on behalf of a coalition of professional organisations representing the collective voice of hundreds of thousands of writers, literary translators, journalists, performers, composers, songwriters, screen directors, screenwriters, visual artists, and other cultural and creative workers.

First, we would like to thank the CULT Committee for the decision to draft an own-initiative report on the “Cultural and creative sectors in the age of AI”. We warmly welcome this much-needed initiative by your committee, given its key responsibilities to protect and promote artistic creation and cultural and linguistic diversity in the EU, and its competences on cultural, audiovisual and media policies.

Over the past few years, our organisations have been tirelessly advocating against AI companies’ massive, untransparent, and unauthorised use of creators’ works and performances. The European Parliament has addressed part of these issues in a pivotal report on copyright and generative AI,[1] which was adopted by the Legal Affairs (JURI) Committee last month. We welcome this report and warmly encourage all MEPs to support it in plenary.

In line with that report, we urge you to uphold the key principles of authorisation, remuneration, transparency (“ART”) towards authors, performers, and other artists and cultural workers across the EU’s cultural policies to ensure Europe’s CCS can thrive in the age of AI while remaining faithful to Europe's fundamental rights and values.

Moreover, generative AI’s impact on our members and the CCS goes beyond those key principles. AI companies misappropriate our members’ works, performances, and personal data by (re-)producing output that is directly and unfairly competing with them. Non-labelled AI outputs also erode trust in news and media and threaten cultural, artistic, and linguistic diversity, jeopardising the main pillars of our democratic societies. These are but a few of the key challenges facing Europe’s cultural and creative sectors in the age of AI.

We call on the CULT Committee to draft an ambitious report that champions the rights and interests of our creative communities and ensure that human creativity is placed at the heart of the forthcoming AI strategy for the CCS, as well any upcoming action under the Culture Compass.

Our key asks to the Members of the CULT Committee:

1.     Reaffirm the right of authors and performers to authorise and prohibit the use of their protected contents by AI and to be fairly remunerated for such use
Pending the design and adoption of a standardised protocol, it should be possible for authors, performers and other rightsholders to exercise their rights and, whenever applicable, their reservation of rights in different and efficient ways, including natural language, in a website’s terms and conditions or in other appropriate files accessible to crawlers. Authors and performers should be entitled to authorise and be remunerated for all uses of their protected works and performances.

2.     Call on the European Commission to ensure the highest level of transparency in the labelling of AI-generated outputs
Article 50 of the AI Act introduced key transparency obligations for labelling and marking AI outputs, which are crucial to inform the public and prevent misinformation, fraud, impersonation and consumer deception as stated in the Act.[2] They are also in line with a 2024 European Parliament resolution[3] which stressed the need to set up a “clear, timely and visible label” to inform the public about AI generated and manipulated content. Moreover, a 2025 EU Barometer survey found that “over 8 out of 10 Europeans prefer content created by humans over Al-generated content”[4], indicating that Europeans are eager to support human-made works, but they can do so only if full transparency is provided. Consumers and recipients appreciate understandable but detailed information to preserve trust in the digital environment. An AI label scale, ranging from fully generated to marginally manipulated, could be a useful tool to achieve this aim.

We urge the CULT Committee to call on the Commission to ensure, through the upcoming Code of Practice on marking and labelling of AI outputs, that Article 50 of the AI Act is implemented in a timely and effective manner that ensures its original aims, and to abandon plans to delay its application by six months, as put forward in the Commission’s proposal of the Digital Omnibus on AI.[5]

3.     Call on the European Commission to impose transparency obligations for AI-generated output on digital platforms and promote best practices

The lack of transparency of AI-generated outputs is an increasingly pressing issue across the CCS. These outputs not only directly compete with human creators’ works, but also unfairly impact their income by claiming or diluting royalties meant to remunerate human authors and performers. This trend contributes to the dehumanisation of the CCS, a development that the public is already experiencing and broadly rejects.

·       In the music sector, streaming platform Deezer recently indicated that over 60,000 fully AI-generated tracks are now uploaded to its service daily[6], with news reports of undisclosed AI “artists” obtaining millions of plays and reducing royalties for authors and performers.[7]

·       In the book sector, on non-European platforms like Amazon, thousands of non-labelled AI-generated “books and audio books”, including products for children or health and self-help books, deceive readers, reduce the visibility of human works, and take advantage of privileges dedicated to human creators, like reduced VAT, or remuneration from pooling schemes meant for human works.

·       In the audiovisual sector, unlabelled synthetic content that replicates highly realistic voices and faces is increasingly circulating across media and distribution channels, including in the press, radio, dubbing, advertising, and audio descriptions.

·       Similarly, in journalistic work and newsroom, the use of AI without human control and review harms public trust and deteriorate editorial and ethical standards.

In light of these issues, it is imperative to introduce obligations on digital platforms to accurately label AI-generated outputs as such, beyond what is established by the AI Act’s obligations, which only apply to AI system providers and deployers. This could also be promoted by encouraging the adoption of industry best practices identified in dialogue with stakeholders.

Such obligations are not only consistent with the AI Act’s objectives to prevent fraud and consumer deception but are also fully in line with the Commission’s vision for the upcoming Digital Fairness Act and the 2030 Consumer Agenda, which identifies fostering the fair and transparent use of AI in consumer markets as one of its key actions.[8]

4.     Call on the Commission to tackle unfair contractual practices in the CCS by issuing guidance against such practices, supporting minimum standards and promoting collective bargaining
Too often, power imbalances vis-à-vis their contractual counterparts can lead authors, performers, and other artists and cultural workers to accept broad and open-ended clauses on AI or waivers covering unknown future uses. For example:

·       In the audiovisual sector, voice actors are under intense pressure to sign contracts granting companies broad rights to train AI systems on their recordings and use synthetic outputs to replace them, particularly in the video games and dubbing industries. The ongoing boycott by German actors of Netflix dubbing sessions is a striking illustration of this trend.[9]

·       In the music and audiovisual sectors, the transfer or assignment of authors and performers’ exclusive rights in older contracts must not be deemed to automatically cover AI uses such as text and data mining (TDM). Licensing agreements between the audiovisual and music industries and AI companies may therefore require the prior consent of all authors and performers concerned.

·       In the book sector, contractual power imbalances are leading to the licensing of rapidly developing AI outputs such as AI summaries or “enhanced” e-books that interactively answer users' questions, as Amazon’s “Ask this Book” is currently being rolled out in the US without rightsholders’ authorisation nor remuneration.

The Committee should urge the Commission to address these practices by issuing clear guidance, supporting robust minimum contractual standards and promoting collective bargaining across the CCS. This also includes the adaptation of European competition law to enable associations of self-employed workers to issue publicly available recommendations on contracts and appropriate remuneration.

5.     Protect and promote Europe’s cultural diversity in the context of AI by ensuring the prominence and discoverability of European works online
AI systems pose a threat to European cultural diversity, including linguistic and artistic diversity. Most generative AI models, especially LLMs, are trained on datasets that overrepresent English at the expense of less widely spoken European languages. Across every creative sector, AI outputs tend to favour mainstream, commercially driven styles that reduce artistic diversity and may reinforce stereotypes and marginalise minority languages and identities.

In this context, it is essential that the Committee calls for measures to protect and promote Europe’s cultural diversity. An important first step to achieve this objective is to ensure the visibility, prominence and discoverability of European works online, as already highlighted in a 2024 European Parliament resolution.[10]

6.     Ensure EU funding prioritises human works and performances and make EU funding conditional on appropriate and proportionate remuneration of authors, performers and other artists and cultural workers
Human-created works and performances should be prioritised across EU funding programmes for the CCS, thereby safeguarding cultural and artistic diversity, social responsibility and human creativity as cornerstones of our society. This is all the more important in a context where AI is being used without transparency to alter authors and performers’ works without their knowledge, consent and fair remuneration.

To achieve this, any EU funding for the cultural and creative sectors should be made conditional on compliance with EU rules on the appropriate and proportionate remuneration of authors and performers, in accordance with the general objective to improve the working conditions of artists defended by the European Parliament and included in the AgoraEU proposal. In line with a 2023 European Parliament resolution,[11] social conditionality should be firmly embedded within AgoraEU and streamlined across the Commission’s Culture Compass and the upcoming AI strategy for the CCS.

7.     Assess the market harm of AI-generated outputs and prevent the loss of jobs and skills linked to AI to protect the future of Europe’s creative and cultural ecosystem
Individual studies from various creative sectors have indicated the dramatic job and income losses that generative AI poses to authors and performers, and their professional and social situation. Moreover, the substitutive effect of generative AI is leading to a loss of skills that not only threatens our creative communities but society at large, with consequences for education, cultural diversity, and critical and independent thinking. Authors, performers and other artists and cultural workers shall not be forced to use generative AI tools that demote them to mere “maintenance staff”, tasked with rectifying AI-generated texts, images, videos, etc., with a corresponding loss of income and skills.

In 2023, the European Parliament already called on the Commission in 2023 to “assess the challenges posed by AI-generated content (...) on the CCS, in particular with regard to authorship and fair remuneration of authors and performers and to develop “job creation action plans and sector-specific financial support and measures to ensure access to adequate social protection for those affected by digitalisation and AI-related job losses.”[12]

Building on such resolution we urge the CULT Committee to ask the Commission to: a) commission a study on the market impact of AI-generated outputs across the European CCS, focusing in particular on authors’ and performers’ income and job opportunities in the context of AI; b) put forward ambitious measures to counterbalance the impact of AI on creative jobs and skills, through collective bargaining where relevant, ensuring the fair remuneration of authors, performers and other artists and cultural workers.

[1] Copyright and generative artificial intelligence – opportunities and challenges (2025/2058(INI)), https://oeil.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/en/procedure-file?reference=2025/2058(INI)

[2] Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Recital 133.

[3] European Parliament resolution of 17 January 2024 on cultural diversity and the conditions for authors in the European music streaming market (2023/2054(INI)), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5711/oj/eng

[4] Special Eurobarometer 562 – Europeans’ attitudes towards culture (May 2025)

[5] European Commission proposal for a Digital Omnibus on AI

[6] https://newsroom-deezer.com/2026/01/ai-generated-music-deezer-selling-detection-tool/

[7] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jul/14/an-ai-generated-band-got-1m-plays-on-spotify-now-music-insiders-say-listeners-should-be-warned

[8] 2030 Consumer Agenda

[9] https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/german-voice-actors-boycott-netflix-over-ai-training-concerns-2026-02-03/

[10] European Parliament resolution of 17 January 2024 on cultural diversity and the conditions for authors in the European music streaming market (2023/2054(INI)), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5711/oj/eng

[11] European Parliament resolution of 21 November 2023 with recommendations to the Commission on an EU framework for the social and professional situation of artists and workers in the cultural and creative sectors (2023/2051(INL)), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52023IP0405

[12] European Parliament resolution of 21 November 2023 (2023/2051(INL)).