The Ivors Academy tells members to send an AI opt-out letter

The audio task

A UK songwriter or composer wants a concrete step to take, not just a position to agree with, if they do not want their catalogue used to train an AI model. The Ivors Academy, which represents UK songwriters and composers, built its campaigning around exactly that gap between stating a principle and giving a member something to send.

What the documents show

The Academy's 'Fighting AI Exploitation' campaign page, as retrieved on 16 September 2026, states it is 'campaigning to protect songwriters' and composers' rights by demanding transparency, consent and fair payment for the use of music in AI training,' and offers members a template 'letter of non-consent' to send to their publisher stating they do not consent to their music training AI models. The page also states the Academy submitted a formal response to a 2025 UK government consultation on a proposed text-and-data-mining copyright exception. In a 18 March 2026 news post, the Academy states the UK government confirmed it would not proceed with that exception, and quotes CEO Roberto Neri welcoming the decision while calling for the government to still 'deliver a framework where AI companies license creative works with authorisation from creators, pay fair remuneration and provide transparency.'

Rights status

Both documents describe advocacy asks, not adopted law. The March 2026 post states current UK law was not weakened by the proposed exception, which the Academy treats as an outcome it welcomes, but it also states that stronger licensing, remuneration and transparency requirements have not yet been delivered and remain the subject of four ongoing government work programmes on digital replicas, labelling, creator control and independent creatives.

What to check before you use it

This is an editorial checklist. A songwriter considering the non-consent letter should check with their own publisher how, or whether, that letter is tracked and honoured in practice, since the Academy's page provides the letter but does not itself state a publisher's legal obligation to act on it. Anyone citing this campaign as evidence of UK policy should check the four government work programmes' current status rather than treating the March 2026 announcement as the end of the process.

• What does my publisher's contract actually say happens after receiving a non-consent letter of this kind?
• Which of the UK government's four AI work programmes have produced a concrete rule since March 2026?
• Does my society's or publisher's practice match the licensing-with-authorisation model the Academy is asking for?

The Ivors Academy's campaign gives members a document to act on immediately, but its own reporting is careful to describe the underlying UK licensing and transparency framework as still being negotiated, not settled.