Industry voices have sounded a stark warning over the European Parliament’s adoption of a non-binding resolution on copyright and generative artificial intelligence.
They argue that the EP’s push for stricter safeguards could impose crippling burdens on Europe’s tech innovators and undermine the continent’s already fragile digital competitiveness.
The own-initiative report, drafted by the EP’s Committee on Legal Affairs under German rapporteur Axel Voss (European People’s Party), calls on the European Commission to introduce enhanced transparency requirements, fair remuneration mechanisms and potentially broad licensing regimes for the use of copyrighted material in AI training.
It stresses that generative AI systems must operate within European Union copyright law, regardless of training location. It advocates for tools such as a centralised EU register of opted-out works managed by the EU Intellectual Property Office to give rightsholders greater control.
The report was approved in Strasbourg yesterday with a resounding 460 votes in favour, 71 against and 88 abstentions.
While creative sector representatives have hailed the text as a vital step towards protecting Europe’s cultural industries, valued at around 6.9 per cent of EU GDP, the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA Europe), which advocates for firms in computing, communications and the internet economy, has reacted with deep concern.
The Brussels-based organisation warns that the report’s proposals risk generating significant legal uncertainty and a de facto “compliance tax” on companies seeking to develop or deploy AI technologies in Europe.
Boniface de Champris, AI Policy Lead at CCIA Europe, said the “non-binding report sends the wrong signal to innovators, and risks holding back Europe’s digital competitiveness on the global stage”.
“The EU already has strong, future-proof rules that carefully balance the interests of rightsholders with AI innovation,” he added.
“The last thing the EU needs right now is more complexity. It just needs to enforce the ones it already has. Let the Copyright Directive and AI Act do their job.”
CCIA Europe argues that the existing framework under the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive already provides a pragmatic balance through its text-and-data-mining exception. That permits training on publicly available material unless rightsholders explicitly opt out, a mechanism that is actively in use.
Shifting towards mandatory prior authorisation or expansive licensing obligations, the association contends, would disproportionately disadvantage start-ups and smaller players unable to afford protracted negotiations.
Major publishers or collective management organisations could potentially price them out of the market and stifle innovation at a time when the EU is striving to close the gap with global leaders in AI.
The resolution’s emphasis on sector-specific protections — particularly for news media where it seeks compensation for revenue losses from AI-generated summaries and aggregation — further heightens industry fears of fragmented compliance requirements across different creative fields.
Although non-binding, the text serves as strong political guidance and could influence forthcoming Commission reviews of the copyright acquisition, scheduled for later in 2026.
Voss said after the vote: “We need clear rules for the use of copyright-protected content for AI training. Legal certainty would let AI developers know which content can be used and how licences can be obtained.
“On the other hand, rightsholders would be protected against unauthorised use of their content and receive remuneration.
“If we want to promote and develop AI in Europe while also protecting our creators, then these provisions are absolutely indispensable,” he concluded.
COMMENT: It is Europe’s critical inferiority in AI that has now emerged as its fundamental Achilles’ heel and the unbreakable chain – or leash – that ties it to America, writes @GElefteriu. https://t.co/pwIgbZZI2m
— Brussels Signal (@brusselssignal) February 12, 2026
