The lottery in Egmond aan Zee for a new guesthouse, 1615. In the foreground an old man and woman holding up a lottery print with an image of the new guesthouse and the prizes to be won and the regulations. Behind them a fisherman and a fishwoman with a fishing net. In the background the village on the coast. The guest house yet to be built has already been included and indicated in the view of the village. At the top a banderole with the name of the village with the coats of arms of Holland and Egmond on either side. Printed from 2 plates.

Statement on Transparency in the AI Act

A fifth round of the trilogue negotiations on the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act is scheduled for October 24, 2023. Together with Creative Commons, and Wikimedia Europe, COMMUNIA, in a statement, calls on the co-legislators to take a holistic approach on AI transparency and agree on proportionate solutions.

As discussed in greater detail in our Policy Paper #15, COMMUNIA deems it essential that the flexibilities for text-and-data mining enshrined in Articles 3 and 4 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive are upheld. For this approach to work in practice, we welcome practical initiatives for greater transparency around AI training data to understand whether opt-outs are being respected.

The full statement is provided below:

Statement on Transparency in the AI Act

The undersigned are civil society organizations advocating in the public interest, and representing  knowledge users and creative communities.

We are encouraged that the Spanish Presidency is considering how to tailor its approach to foundation models more carefully, including an emphasis on transparency. We reiterate that copyright is not the only prism through which reporting and transparency requirements should be seen in the AI Act.

General transparency responsibilities for training data

Greater openness and transparency in the development of AI models can serve the public interest and facilitate better sharing by building trust among creators and users. As such, we generally support more transparency around the training data for regulated AI systems, and not only on training data that is protected by copyright.

Copyright balance

We also believe that the existing copyright flexibilities for the use of copyrighted materials as training data must be upheld. The 2019 Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market and specifically its provisions on text-and-data mining exceptions for scientific research purposes and for general purposes provide a suitable framework for AI training. They offer legal certainty and strike the right balance between the rights of rightsholders and the freedoms necessary to stimulate scientific research and further creativity and innovation.

Proportionate approach

We support a proportionate, realistic, and practical approach to meeting the transparency obligation, which would put less onerous burdens on smaller players including non-commercial players and SMEs, as well as models developed using FOSS, in order not to stifle innovation in AI development. Too burdensome an obligation on such players may create significant barriers to innovation and drive market concentration, leading the development of AI to only occur within a small number of large, well-resourced commercial operators.

Lack of clarity on copyright transparency obligation

We welcome the proposal to require AI developers to disclose the copyright compliance policies followed during the training of regulated AI systems. We are still concerned with the lack of clarity on the scope and content of the obligation to provide a detailed summary of the training data. AI developers should not be expected to literally list out every item in the training content. We maintain that such level of detail is not practical, nor is it necessary for implementing opt-outs and assessing compliance with the general purpose text-and-data mining exception. We would welcome further clarification by the co-legislators on this obligation. In addition, an independent and accountable entity, such as the foreseen AI Office, should develop processes to implement it.


Etching of a printer's press by Abraham Bosse.
Featured Blog post:
Sign up for our new monthly newsletter!
Read more
Newer post
The transparency provision in the AI Act: What needs to happen after the 4th trilogue?
November 7, 2023
Older post
We need to talk about AI and transparency!
October 6, 2023