The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the review of Creative Value Chains – Copyright and Beyond for a Better Value Distribution by Yaniv Benhamou (University of Geneva). This book review has been prepared by Katfriend Peter Ling (attorney-at-law, Zurich).
Over to Peter:
![]() |
The Diagnosis
The book opens (Part I) with a grounded, well-sourced account of how digital technology (including but not limited to artificial intelligence) has reorganized value creation and distribution in music, visual arts, and video games. The book greatly benefits from the fact that its author is not only a lawyer and a law professor, but also a musician. The description of the music industry in particular reads more like a report from an industry insider rather than a review of legal literature. The findings are sobering and an eye-opener for anyone interested in the current state of play of the creative industry.
A central idea from the outset is that the "creative value chain" is populated not just by authors and performers, but also by platform workers and digital workers whose contribution is data or attention, rather than copyrightable expression. The book accordingly looks at all actors and all valuable inputs, whether copyright-protected or not.
The description of the state of play also reveals how the three examined industries (music, visual arts, video games) seem to live on different planets for some aspects, but suffer from similar ailings for other aspects. For example, the art market has so far resisted digitization more stubbornly than music, but the vast majority of visual artists capture a very small share of the value created in almost all transactions that are freely negotiated with platforms and gatekeepers. Video games, meanwhile, have become the dominant creative industry globally, organized increasingly around a games-as-a-service model with 3.5 billion players worldwide and a turnover superior to music and cinema combined.
The Prescriptions
Part II is where the real fireworks start. Benhamou moves from diagnosis to a genuinely comprehensive menu of solutions: legal (Chapter 4), political (Chapter 5), and "individual and technological" (Chapter 6). This breadth is one of the book's real strengths: it speaks not just to IP lawyers, but to anyone tracking where creative value chains are headed.
Legal fixes
![]() |
| Photo from Peter Ling. |
On AI remuneration, the book maps the polarized camps: "maximalists" (creators, labels, publishers) wanting copyright clarified and strengthened, versus "minimalists" (platforms, AI developers, open-source advocates) who see strong copyright as mainly benefiting those with the resources to enforce it. Between the extremes, Benhamou explores options including data trusts, opt-in licensing, collectively managed remuneration rights, and (perhaps most provocatively) extending the CDSM Article 17 platform-liability model to AI itself.
One particularly sharp observation is that if rights holders are given an exclusive right to withdraw their works from AI training, the predictable long-run effect is that withdrawn works will gradually disappear from AI outputs altogether, and their creators may eventually have to pay to become visible again. A pure exclusive right, Benhamou argues, is therefore probably the wrong tool for most creators.
One of the book's most original proposals is a hybrid licensing architecture that inverts today's contractual logic: instead of platforms dictating terms of service, rights holders would select from standardized, Creative Commons-style modular licenses with a copyleft "share alike" clause propagating downstream. Data intermediaries or sector-specific data trusts would enforce compliance. It is a well-thought-through model, and beyond describing its advantages, Benhamou is also admirably candid about the coordination overhead and the risk that value distributed to millions of small contributors becomes merely symbolic once management costs are deducted.
Political and technological fixes
Chapter 5 surveys measures ranging from the realistic (artist social security, transparency rules, targeted subsidies) to the radical (universal basic income for creators, turnover taxes on platforms and AI models, employee profit-sharing). The book wisely suggests sequencing such ideas: short-term and uncontroversial reforms should be implemented first, structural and more controversial ideas can wait until later.
Chapter 6 is, deliberately so, the most speculative (and perhaps the most fun). The section on "algorithmic resistance" reads like a digital-age Luddite handbook: dataset-poisoning tools (Glaze, Nightshade, Nepenthes) feed AI crawlers unusable data, while creators use altered spellings and coded hashtags to game platform visibility. But, as Benhamou concedes, resistance may be futile — poisoning invites an arms race that simply increases energy costs, while visibility hacks work within platform logics rather than challenging them.
The book's most radical proposal comes last: "input-as-commons," treating AI training data as a collective public good, potentially tokenized on a blockchain and managed like a community fishery. Utopian? Maybe. But as a thought experiment about where digital culture could go, it is a stimulating close.
Verdict
Creative Value Chains is an unusually rich book for its size. Part I alone is essential reading for anyone looking for a clear, well-sourced account of how streaming, NFTs, and generative AI have already reorganized creative industries. Part II delivers a genuinely comprehensive survey of legal, political, and technological responses. The inclusion of political and infrastructure-level proposals is what sets this book apart from most IP scholarship in my view. Benhamou's ambition occasionally outruns the available space. One would like to read more about, say, the copyright status of prompting or the data-trust blueprint described in the book. However, for a book covering this fast-moving field with genuine interdisciplinary breadth, those are quibbles rather than flaws. Recommended for IP practitioners, policymakers, and anyone who cares about how creative work is valued in the age of AI.
Reviewed by Jocelyn Bosse
on
Friday, July 24, 2026
Rating:


No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html