Government’s Consideration of AI Policy Changes
The Government of Great Britain is reportedly considering modifications to its copyright laws to foster artificial intelligence innovations, following significant pushback from the music industry and other creative sectors.
Simultaneously, several key parliamentarians involved in AI and cultural industry policy are urging the government to focus on making copyright regulations clearer, which is crucial for the training of AI models—a major concern in discussions about AI policy.
Calls for Transparency in AI Training
In a letter addressed to Minister of Science, Innovation and Technology Peter Kyle and Minister of Culture, Media and Sports Lisa Nandy, members of two parliamentary committees articulated that the government “must implement practical solutions to ensure transparency in AI data, regardless of its stance on copyright law.”
The letter from the Committee on Science, Innovation and Technology (SITC) and the Committee on Culture, Media and Sports (CMS) emphasized the principle that all individuals should receive fair compensation for their creative contributions.
It highlighted the significance of copyright regulations, noting that even companies involved in artificial art benefit from copyright protection.
“Original non-literary written works, including software, web content, and databases, are protected by copyright under UK law, not patents,” the letter stated.
“The case of Deepseek, which OpenAI is alleged to have violated by copying outputs to train its model, illustrates the potential risks involved for tech companies if copyright laws are weakened,” the letter continued.
Industry Opposition and Alternative Proposals
The letter was dispatched on February 25, coinciding with the deadline for feedback on the government’s AI policy consultation.
The British government is contemplating a “default refusal” policy, requiring copyright owners to explicitly deny permission for their materials to be used in AI training. In the absence of such a refusal, companies could utilize the materials as default.
“The core of our recommendations is the principle that all creators deserve fair compensation for their work.”
Science, Innovation, and Technology Committees; Committee on Culture, Media and Sports
However, the Guardian reported that, facing considerable opposition from the cultural sector, particularly music, the Labour Government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer is contemplating concessions to address these concerns.
One potential adjustment suggested by the Guardian would restrict the refusal policy to British companies, allowing UK developers to use copyrighted materials by default unless they explicitly opt out, while AI developers from the USA and elsewhere would be required to seek permission from rights holders beforehand.
Another consideration could permit creative industries to opt out of AI training by default, while allowing media outlets, such as newspapers and TV networks, to use materials for AI training without prior consent, according to the Guardian.
Potential changes come amidst what the Guardian describes as “intense lobbying” against the default refusal proposal by prominent artists.
Earlier this week, 1000 musicians, including Damon Albarn, Kate Bush, and Annie Lennox, released a “quiet album” in protest against the proposed changes.
Last week, the heads of three major global music companies—Sony Music Entertainment (SME), Universal Music Group (UMG), and Warner Music Group (WMG)—joined the Daily Mail campaign to halt the default refusal policy.
MSP Chairman Rob Stringer asserted that “creators should be rewarded for their involvement in this technological revolution,” while WMG CEO Robert Kinsler claimed the proposed rule “undermines the ability of artists and songwriters, copyright owners who invest in them, and the creative community to monetize and control their work, sustaining their livelihoods.”
“The government’s default refusal proposal for creators to deny permission for AI training resembles robbers being allowed into your home simply because your front door lacks a prominent sign that theft is prohibited.”
Dame Caroline Dinenage MP
The Chair and Head of UMG Sir Lucian Grainge stated that the UK “is at a critical juncture, as ‘made in Britain’ and its global exports are not limited to physical products but also include intellectual property and copyright, representing music, visual arts, life sciences, and more.”
In a statement published on February 26, Dame Caroline Dinenage MP, the chair of the CMS parliamentary committee, likened the proposed default refusal rule to “allowing robbers into your home if there is no conspicuous sign on your front door that theft is not permitted.”
Chi Onwurah MP, chair of the SITC committee, urged the government to “find a suitable solution for the relationship between AI developers and rights holders, balancing both parties’ interests for the public good.”
Onwurah added, “The technical solution needs to be user-friendly and accessible to everyone, whether it’s an AI startup or an individual rights holder. The government cannot fulfill its obligations to both the creative and AI sectors without it.”
