Lords warn AI copyright changes could harm creative sector • The Register

The UK's creative industries face an existential threat from proposed changes to copyright law that would benefit AI companies at the expense of artists, musicians, and creators, according to a House of Lords committee report that warns ministers against trading away Britain's £124 billion creative sector for uncertain AI promises.

The House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee has delivered a stark warning to the government about the dangers of weakening copyright protections to accommodate AI model training. The report, published this week, argues that the UK's creative industries—which contributed £124 billion to the economy in 2023 and employ 2.4 million people—are being asked to sacrifice their livelihoods for the benefit of a handful of US-based tech giants.

Committee chair Baroness Barbara Keeley minced no words in her assessment of the government's current trajectory. "Our creative industries face a clear and present danger from uncredited and unremunerated use of copyrighted material to train AI models," she stated. "Photographers, musicians, authors and publishers are seeing their work fed into AI models which then produce imitations that take employment and earning opportunities from the original creators."

The numbers tell a compelling story about the relative importance of these two sectors to the UK economy. While the creative industries generated £124 billion in 2023 with projections to reach £141 billion by 2030, the AI sector contributed just £12 billion in 2024 and employs only 86,000 people. This stark contrast forms the basis of the committee's argument that weakening copyright protections would be economic folly.

The committee's report takes particular aim at proposals for a commercial text and data mining (TDM) exception that would allow AI companies to scrape copyrighted content without permission or compensation. Such an exception, the peers argue, would harm rightsholders and stall the emerging licensing market that could provide fair compensation for creators whose work is used to train AI models.

This stance represents a significant challenge to the government's current approach. In late 2024, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology published a consultation document that included proposals for TDM exceptions for AI training. However, the Financial Times reported this week that ministers are now considering delaying these contentious changes following a backlash from the creative industries.

The creative sector's opposition to the proposed changes has been both organized and high-profile. In May last year, over 400 leading UK media and arts professionals wrote to the prime minister supporting an amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill that would provide transparency over copyrighted works ingested by AI models. The letter garnered support from music legends including Paul McCartney, Elton John, and Coldplay, as well as writer/director Richard Curtis, artist Antony Gormley, and actor Ian McKellen.

The committee's recommendations go beyond simply opposing the TDM exception. It calls on the government to make clear that it will not seek to introduce such an exception with an opt-out mechanism for training commercial AI models. Instead, the peers advocate for strengthening UK protections for creators, including against unauthorized digital replicas and "in the style of" uses of creators' work and identity.

This debate reflects a broader global tension between the rapid advancement of AI technology and the rights of content creators. The UK finds itself at a crossroads, with the potential to either protect its world-renowned creative industries or to prioritize the growth of AI companies that are predominantly based in the United States.

The committee's report characterizes the government's current approach as "a race to the bottom that does not serve UK interests." Baroness Keeley's warning that the government should not "sacrifice our creative industries for AI jam tomorrow" captures the essence of the committee's position: the UK should not compromise its existing economic strengths for uncertain future gains in AI development.

As the government weighs its options, the creative industries are watching closely. The outcome of this debate will have profound implications not just for artists and creators, but for the entire UK economy. With £124 billion in economic value and 2.4 million jobs at stake, the stakes could hardly be higher.

The committee's report represents a significant intervention in what has become one of the most contentious policy debates in the UK. As AI technology continues to advance, finding the right balance between innovation and protecting the rights of creators will remain a critical challenge for policymakers around the world.