Paul McCartney Joins Music Industry Protest Against Artificial Intelligence With Silent Track | Paul McCartney

At 2 minutes and 45 seconds, it’s roughly the same length as With a Little Help from My Friends. But Paul McCartney’s first new recording in five years lacks lyrical melody and cheerful guitar chops because there are almost none.

The former Beatle, arguably Britain’s greatest living songwriter, has released an almost entirely silent recording studio track as part of a music industry protest against copyright theft by artificial intelligence companies.

Instead of catchy melodies and evocative lyrics, there is only a quiet hiss and an eerie rumble. He points out that if AI companies unfairly exploit musicians’ intellectual property to train their generative AI models, the creative ecosystem will be destroyed and original music silenced.

McCartney, 83 and currently touring North America, has added the track to the B-side of the LP titled “Is This What We Want?”, which is full of other silent recordings and will be pressed on vinyl and released later this month.

McCartney’s contribution comes as musicians and artists intensify their campaign to persuade the UK government to ban technology companies from training AI models on their creative output without approval or paying royalties. Meanwhile, Britain faces anti-regulation pressure from Donald Trump’s White House.

The album’s track listing states, “The British government should not legalize the theft of music for AI companies.”

“I’m very concerned that the government is paying more attention to the interests of US tech companies rather than the interests of British creators,” said Ed Newton Rex, the composer and copyright justice campaigner behind the protest album.

Other artists already supporting the campaign include Sam Fender, Kate Bush, Hans Zimmer and the Pet Shop Boys.

McCartney’s new contribution is called the Bonus Track, and like his best songs, it arguably has a beginning, middle and end. It fades out quickly and begins with 55 seconds of tape hiss before 15 seconds of an indefinite rumble that could be someone opening a door and stepping, before settling into another 80 seconds of intermittent hiss and ending with a slow, poignant fade-out.

McCartney was among the leading voices in British music to express concern about ministers’ plans for a new deal between creators and AI companies such as Open AI, Google, Anthropic and Elon Musk’s xAI, which demands access to huge amounts of training information including text, images and music.

“we[’ve] We have to be careful about this because it might take over and we don’t want that to happen, especially for young composers and writers. [for] Who, this may be the only way for them[’re] “I’m going to make a career,” McCartney said of AI. “And if AI kills that, that would be very sad indeed.”

Bush, another artist who participated in the protest album, said: “In the music of the future, will our voices remain unheard?” Composer Max Richter said: “The government’s proposals would impoverish creative people, favoring those who automate creativity over the people who compose our music, write our literature, and paint our art.”

The government has consulted on allowing an exception to UK copyright law in relation to “text and data mining”, which includes the possibility of requiring copyright holders to actively opt out of their works being used to train AI models. Ministers are having difficulty balancing the interests of the creative industries, which add £125bn a year to the UK economy, and US technology companies, which want relaxed regulation and have recently announced investments of more than £30bn, mostly in data centres.

A new legal regime for AI and copyright is not expected to be debated in Parliament before 2026. Meanwhile, the government has signed deals with AI companies including Open AI, Google and Anthropic to boost the adoption of AI across government and the wider economy.

“We have to let AI use that,” Trump said [copyrighted] body of knowledge without going through the complexities of contract negotiations,” and international governments have warned against “establishing rules and regulations…that make it impossible” for AI companies to do business.

“The government is trying to play both sides without convincing either side,” Biban Kidron, a film director who advocates for copyright protection, told The Guardian.

“They have proven that they are not qualified to govern for the economic interests of creators,” she added.

Liz Kendall, Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, is committed to finding a solution between AI companies and innovators and “recognizes that both sectors are British success stories, and she speaks to both sides,” a government source said.

There was concern when he appointed a special counsel in September, Kendall, who previously said: “Whether or not you think philosophically that big AI companies should compensate content creators, in practice they never have to legally.”

In response to McCartney’s intervention, a government spokesman said the government puts the interests of UK citizens and businesses first.

“We have always been clear about the need to work with both the creative industries and the AI ​​sector to drive AI innovations and ensure strong protections for creators,” they said.

“We are bringing together UK and global companies, along with voices beyond the AI ​​and creative sectors, to ensure we can get the widest possible range of expert views as we think about next steps.”