This collection of sources focuses on the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and creative industries, particularly music, sparked by a recent vote in the British Parliament.

The central argument, put forth by Enrique Dans and supported by several commentators, is that demands from the cultural lobby to force AI companies to disclose training data are technically unfeasible and conceptually flawed, akin to restricting artistic inspiration.

They highlight the parliament's rejection of a transparency amendment as a move towards embracing innovation over protecting outdated business models.

While some commentators agree, drawing parallels to past technological shifts, others argue that AI's industrial-scale processing of creative works is fundamentally different from human inspiration and that AI companies should compensate creators.

The sources collectively present a debate about the nature of creativity, intellectual property in the digital age, and the economic implications of AI for various sectors.

This article is also available in English on my Medium page, «AI is not theft: the UK just got it right«