Curbing Big Tech’s power over media outlets requires publishers, journalists, and photographers to speak with one voice. While the Danish news industry has led the way with a collective management organization, this effort would be bolstered by measures to improve enforcement of the European Union’s copyright law.
COPENHAGEN – As AI slop spreads across the internet, concerns about the future of high-quality information are growing. Without accurate and relevant human-generated data, model collapse – whereby generative artificial intelligence trains on its own output and gradually degrades – seems inevitable. The tech giants, well aware of this risk, have cut corners and skirted copyright law in their pursuit of training data for their large language models.
There is a simple solution: these large US companies could pay for the content they use, whether to develop generative AI or to keep social-media users scrolling. In 2021, Australia’s competition authority issued a news media bargaining code requiring platforms to pay for the news from which they profit, which led many tech companies to reach voluntary deals with media organizations. When Meta (which owns Facebook and Instagram) failed to renew these deals in 2024, the Australian government updated the code to include a digital-platform levy. Other countries are considering similar measures.
Europe has already taken some steps in this direction. The European Union’s Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, which came into force in June 2019 and was supposed to be transposed by member states into national law by June 2021, has provided a framework for securing fair compensation for European publishers.
In Denmark, this led to the creation in July 2021 of the Danish Press Publications’ Collective Management Organization (or the DPCMO, of which I am CEO). Representing 99% of the Danish news industry, from newspapers and magazines to digital outlets and public-service broadcasters, the DPCMO has been authorized by the Danish Ministry of Culture to grant extended collective licenses. At first, we had the authority to conclude agreements on behalf of publishers regarding their rights (and neighboring rights) with search engines, social-media platforms, and news apps. In May 2024, the mandate was expanded to include text and data mining by AI firms.
The DPCMO has successfully pushed some tech companies to negotiate collectively with publishers. Interim licensing agreements have been signed with all search engines on the Danish market, including Google, Bing, Yahoo, and DuckDuckGo. We have also reached an agreement with Upday, Axel Springer’s news app.
But other firms have been more obstinate. In April 2024, the DPCMO threatened to sue OpenAI if the company did not strike a group deal, as opposed to licensing agreements with individual publications. After OpenAI’s lawyer announced that further communication with the DPCMO would not be productive, we requested mediation with OpenAI, and Danish Minister of Culture Jakob Engel-Schmidt is expected to appoint a mediator soon.
Don’t miss our next event, taking place at the AI Action Summit in Paris. Register now, and watch live on February 10 as leading thinkers consider what effective AI governance demands.
Register Now
Likewise, Apple refused to enter into an agreement with the DPCMO regarding its Apple News app. As a result, the DPCMO, together with the Danish Media Association, the Danish Rights Alliance and the Danish Union of Journalists, reported Apple to the police, alleging that the app’s use of news content constitutes a copyright violation. Apple ultimately made the app unavailable in Denmark.
Meta and ByteDance (which owns TikTok) argued that their social-media sites fall outside the scope of articles 15 and 17 of the EU’s Directive on Copyright, which provide new rules on content-sharing platforms, and subsequently refused to participate in mediation and arbitration with the DPCMO. Together with the Danish Media Association, we brought a complaint against Meta and ByteDance to the European Commission, arguing that the firms have violated the Digital Market Act’s data-access regulations. The case is pending.
The reason for filing multiple lawsuits is to uphold EU copyright law, which serves as a crucial framework for regulating relations between the press and Big Tech. We have taken inspiration from the French competition authority (L’Autorité de la Concurrence), which found that Google’s conduct in relation to its search engine and generative AI chatbot Gemini (formerly known as Bard) has prevented publishers from assessing and negotiating remuneration for neighboring rights and is thus an abuse of dominance.
In the second half of this year, Denmark will assume the presidency of the Council of the EU, which holds agenda-setting powers. Given that one of Denmark’s priorities for the presidency is to rein in Big Tech, we urge Engel-Schmidt to lead an EU-wide effort to improve enforcement of the Directive on Copyright. One way to do this is to introduce a “final offer arbitration” mechanism, whereby arbitration is mandatory, and the arbitrator must choose one of the last offers presented by the parties, as Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom have done.
As Council of the EU president, Denmark must also focus on accelerating efforts to counter mis- and disinformation, including deep fakes, and, relatedly, to improve media literacy. To that end, EU policymakers should seek input from ordinary citizens, not just experts. Rebuilding trust in the media ecosystem requires collective action and broad support.
Curbing Big Tech’s power over news outlets requires policymakers, civil servants, NGOs, academics, collective management organizations, and youth activists to stand together. Perhaps more important, journalists, photographers, and publishers must speak with one voice, so that tech firms cannot divide and rule. If we want to preserve a free and pluralist press – an essential pillar of democracy – our time and energy should be spent fighting these massive companies, not each other.
To have unlimited access to our content including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, PS OnPoint and PS The Big Picture, please subscribe
In betting that the economic fallout from his sweeping new tariffs will be worth the gains in border security, US President Donald Trump is gambling with America’s long-term influence and prosperity. In the future, more countries will have even stronger reasons to try to reduce their reliance on the United States.
thinks Donald Trump's trade policies will undermine the very goals they aim to achieve.
While America’s AI industry arguably needed shaking up, the news of a Chinese startup beating Big Tech at its own game raises some difficult questions. Fortunately, if US tech leaders and policymakers can take the right lessons from DeepSeek's success, we could all end up better for it.
considers what an apparent Chinese breakthrough means for the US tech industry, and innovation more broadly.
COPENHAGEN – As AI slop spreads across the internet, concerns about the future of high-quality information are growing. Without accurate and relevant human-generated data, model collapse – whereby generative artificial intelligence trains on its own output and gradually degrades – seems inevitable. The tech giants, well aware of this risk, have cut corners and skirted copyright law in their pursuit of training data for their large language models.
There is a simple solution: these large US companies could pay for the content they use, whether to develop generative AI or to keep social-media users scrolling. In 2021, Australia’s competition authority issued a news media bargaining code requiring platforms to pay for the news from which they profit, which led many tech companies to reach voluntary deals with media organizations. When Meta (which owns Facebook and Instagram) failed to renew these deals in 2024, the Australian government updated the code to include a digital-platform levy. Other countries are considering similar measures.
Europe has already taken some steps in this direction. The European Union’s Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market, which came into force in June 2019 and was supposed to be transposed by member states into national law by June 2021, has provided a framework for securing fair compensation for European publishers.
In Denmark, this led to the creation in July 2021 of the Danish Press Publications’ Collective Management Organization (or the DPCMO, of which I am CEO). Representing 99% of the Danish news industry, from newspapers and magazines to digital outlets and public-service broadcasters, the DPCMO has been authorized by the Danish Ministry of Culture to grant extended collective licenses. At first, we had the authority to conclude agreements on behalf of publishers regarding their rights (and neighboring rights) with search engines, social-media platforms, and news apps. In May 2024, the mandate was expanded to include text and data mining by AI firms.
The DPCMO has successfully pushed some tech companies to negotiate collectively with publishers. Interim licensing agreements have been signed with all search engines on the Danish market, including Google, Bing, Yahoo, and DuckDuckGo. We have also reached an agreement with Upday, Axel Springer’s news app.
But other firms have been more obstinate. In April 2024, the DPCMO threatened to sue OpenAI if the company did not strike a group deal, as opposed to licensing agreements with individual publications. After OpenAI’s lawyer announced that further communication with the DPCMO would not be productive, we requested mediation with OpenAI, and Danish Minister of Culture Jakob Engel-Schmidt is expected to appoint a mediator soon.
PS Events: AI Action Summit 2025
Don’t miss our next event, taking place at the AI Action Summit in Paris. Register now, and watch live on February 10 as leading thinkers consider what effective AI governance demands.
Register Now
Likewise, Apple refused to enter into an agreement with the DPCMO regarding its Apple News app. As a result, the DPCMO, together with the Danish Media Association, the Danish Rights Alliance and the Danish Union of Journalists, reported Apple to the police, alleging that the app’s use of news content constitutes a copyright violation. Apple ultimately made the app unavailable in Denmark.
Meta and ByteDance (which owns TikTok) argued that their social-media sites fall outside the scope of articles 15 and 17 of the EU’s Directive on Copyright, which provide new rules on content-sharing platforms, and subsequently refused to participate in mediation and arbitration with the DPCMO. Together with the Danish Media Association, we brought a complaint against Meta and ByteDance to the European Commission, arguing that the firms have violated the Digital Market Act’s data-access regulations. The case is pending.
The reason for filing multiple lawsuits is to uphold EU copyright law, which serves as a crucial framework for regulating relations between the press and Big Tech. We have taken inspiration from the French competition authority (L’Autorité de la Concurrence), which found that Google’s conduct in relation to its search engine and generative AI chatbot Gemini (formerly known as Bard) has prevented publishers from assessing and negotiating remuneration for neighboring rights and is thus an abuse of dominance.
In the second half of this year, Denmark will assume the presidency of the Council of the EU, which holds agenda-setting powers. Given that one of Denmark’s priorities for the presidency is to rein in Big Tech, we urge Engel-Schmidt to lead an EU-wide effort to improve enforcement of the Directive on Copyright. One way to do this is to introduce a “final offer arbitration” mechanism, whereby arbitration is mandatory, and the arbitrator must choose one of the last offers presented by the parties, as Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom have done.
As Council of the EU president, Denmark must also focus on accelerating efforts to counter mis- and disinformation, including deep fakes, and, relatedly, to improve media literacy. To that end, EU policymakers should seek input from ordinary citizens, not just experts. Rebuilding trust in the media ecosystem requires collective action and broad support.
Curbing Big Tech’s power over news outlets requires policymakers, civil servants, NGOs, academics, collective management organizations, and youth activists to stand together. Perhaps more important, journalists, photographers, and publishers must speak with one voice, so that tech firms cannot divide and rule. If we want to preserve a free and pluralist press – an essential pillar of democracy – our time and energy should be spent fighting these massive companies, not each other.