UK Government Offers Concessions to Quell Opposition Over Controversial AI Copyright Plans
Ministers pledge economic impact assessment amid backlash from creatives and MPs
The UK government is attempting to ease growing opposition to its controversial AI copyright proposals by offering concessions, including a promise to conduct an economic impact assessment. The move aims to win over critics in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, as well as high-profile figures from the creative industries.
The government’s proposal, which would allow artificial intelligence companies to train their models on copyright-protected content without prior permission unless rights holders opt out, has sparked strong backlash. Cultural icons such as Sir Paul McCartney, Sir Tom Stoppard, and Kate Bush have joined a chorus of critics, arguing the plan threatens the rights and livelihoods of creators.
Opposition to the bill has gained momentum in the House of Lords, where peers passed amendments to curb the government’s approach. Some backbench MPs have also voiced serious concerns.
In a bid to keep the Data (Use and Access) Bill from becoming bogged down in legislative "ping pong"—the process where the bill is repeatedly passed back and forth between the Commons and Lords as changes are debated—ministers are offering an economic impact report. This assessment is expected to explore how AI developers gain access to training data and how the use of copyright-protected works is tracked and disclosed.
Baroness Beeban Kidron, the crossbench peer behind several key amendments to improve transparency in the bill, has criticised the government’s stance, claiming it prioritises the interests of powerful US tech firms over UK creators. Her amendments, which were stripped from the bill by the government, would have provided creators with more insight into how their work is being used by AI developers.
“In the absence of a UK government willing to protect its workers and wealth creators, at least that way UK-based copyright holders would have some of the tools to protect themselves,” Kidron said.
Labour MP James Frith, a member of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, welcomed the government's willingness to engage in dialogue but stressed the need for full transparency and fair compensation for creators.
“I have yet to see an explanation as to why AI companies are held back by copyright or by having to pay for content,” Frith said.
A government spokesperson stated that no final decisions have been made and that officials are still reviewing responses to the public consultation. “We are carefully considering the consultation responses and continue to engage with tech companies, the creative industries, and parliament to inform our approach. We have always been clear that no changes will be made until we are absolutely confident we have a practical plan that delivers on each of our objectives.”
The government’s formal response to the consultation is expected to be published later this summer or by October.
