Education

UK AI bill amended to require permission from creators before training on protected works

Wednesday, 14 May 2025 12:11AM UTC

The UK government has reversed its proposed "opt-out" approach for AI training data, now mandating that developers obtain consent from rights holders. This shift follows strong opposition from the creative sector and aims to better protect artists’ livelihoods while fostering AI innovation.

The UK’s burgeoning landscape of artificial intelligence is facing significant scrutiny, particularly concerning the government's proposed "opt-out" mechanism aimed at regulating how AI models are trained. This initiative, which would have allowed generative AI developers to utilise protected works without express permission unless rights holders proactively opted out, has recently encountered substantial opposition and a notable legislative setback.

Reports suggest that the amendment to the AI bill, viewed as a severe defeat for the ongoing legislation, has dramatically shifted the balance of power back towards creators. The amended proposal would now require AI developers to obtain permission from copyright owners before using their works for training, effectively reversing the onus placed on creators to opt out. As outlined in the amendment, companies would be obliged to provide detailed information concerning the data sets used in training their models and to inform rights holders of any individual works utilised.

This move comes on the heels of widespread criticism from the creative industry, including notable figures such as Elton John and Paul McCartney, who signed a letter condemning the bill. The musical community launched a silent protest album titled "Is This What We Want?" to draw attention to the risks posed by the proposed legislation. The campaign reflects broader concerns that the “opt-out” approach could severely undermine the creative economy, jeopardising the livelihoods of artists and the cultural heritage of the UK.

Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer recently outlined intentions to increase transparency surrounding AI training processes, echoing calls for supportive regulations while protecting the interests of creatives. The government's commitment to balance its ambitions to position the UK as a leading AI hub with the safeguarding of its cultural industry indicates an evolving understanding of the complex interplay between technology and the arts.

Interestingly, research from the University of Cambridge has delved into the implications of the proposed "rights reservation" model for AI data usage, arguing that it contradicts underpinnings of copyright law. Critics maintain that the burden of opting out would disproportionately affect emerging artists who may lack the resources to navigate such complexities. The researchers advocate for clearly defined policies affirming that human authors alone hold copyrights, regardless of AI involvement, and recommend establishing compensation frameworks for creators whose works are frequently integrated into AI training prompts.

The global stage mirrors these concerns, with similar debates unfolding across borders. Within the United States, platforms like SoundCloud grapple with the ethical implications of AI training while defending creative rights amidst legal challenges. Data suggests that developers based in regions with less stringent intellectual property laws are often training their models on protected material without consent, raising ethical questions about the responsibilities of tech companies in an interconnected landscape.

As discussions around the AI bill continue, with the amended legislation moving to the House of Commons for further deliberation, one thing is clear: The UK's creative sector is committed to safeguarding its rights in an era where technology increasingly intersects with artistic expression. The long-term impact of these regulations may well define the relationship between AI innovation and the creative economy, necessitating continuous dialogue to ensure fairness for all stakeholders involved.

Sustaining this momentum may require further policy advancements beyond mere amendments. Transparency and fair compensation must be cornerstones in any approach that seeks to harness the power of AI while respecting the invaluable contributions of creators. As this complex narrative unfolds, the balance between technological advancement and artistic integrity remains a pivotal point of debate in the ongoing evolution of copyright law.

Reference Map

Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 1

Source: Noah Wire Services

More on this

https://www.newsbreak.com/digital-music-news-296091106/4005877410974-uk-s-opt-out-ai-training-bill-suffers-amendment-setback-following-ample-music-space-criticism - Please view link - unable to able to access data
https://www.ft.com/content/17f4c7ee-b1bc-4bde-8e92-bebb555479a2 - The UK government is working on rules to increase transparency over how tech companies train their AI models using creative works. Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer announced plans to create regulations ensuring greater transparency about the content used by AI developers, allowing the industry to detect if their work is being copied without permission. This initiative aims to balance the UK's ambition to become a global AI hub with the protection of its creative industries. The government is also considering similar rules to those in the EU, which require developers to publish detailed summaries of content used for training.
https://ai.cam.ac.uk/news/government-s-proposed-opt-out-model-for-training-ai-goes-against-the-spirit-of-copyright-law-asserts-new-report-from-cambridge-researchers - Researchers from the University of Cambridge have criticized the UK government's proposed 'rights reservation' model for AI data mining, which would require creators to actively opt out if they do not want their works used to train AI models. The report argues that this approach places an undue burden on emerging creative talents and is not in the spirit of copyright law. The researchers suggest that the government should clearly state that only human authors can hold copyright, even when AI is heavily involved, and develop guidelines for compensating artists whose work is used in AI prompts.
https://musically.com/2025/02/25/uks-creative-sector-pushes-back-against-opt-out-ai-training-proposal/ - The UK's creative sector has launched a vigorous campaign against the government's proposed opt-out system for AI training on copyrighted works. Over 1,000 musicians, including Kate Bush and Paul McCartney, have released a silent protest album titled 'Is This What We Want?' to highlight their opposition. The campaign warns that the proposed changes could harm the UK's cultural heritage and creative economy, emphasizing the need for policies that protect creators' rights in the age of generative AI.
https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/blog/ai-ip/ - A report from the University of Cambridge's Bennett Institute for Public Policy and the Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy argues that the UK's proposed 'opt-out' model for AI training contradicts the spirit of copyright law. The researchers suggest that this approach could harm the UK's creative sector and propose mandatory transparency requirements for AI training data, along with standardized licensing agreements that properly value creative works, to ensure fair compensation for creators.
https://legaltechnology.com/2024/09/20/linkedin-suspends-opt-out-ai-model-training-for-uk-following-ico-concerns/ - LinkedIn has suspended its opt-out model for using UK customer data to train AI models following concerns raised by the UK's Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). The platform had introduced a privacy setting allowing users to opt out of having their data used for AI training, but after public outcry and regulatory concerns, LinkedIn decided to halt this practice for users in the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom, emphasizing the importance of user privacy and data protection.
https://www.dlapiper.com/en/insights/blogs/mse-today/2025/training-ai-models-uk-government-proposes-eu-style-opt-out-copyright-exception - The UK government has proposed a new 'opt-out' exception to copyright laws, similar to the EU's approach, allowing tech companies to use copyrighted material to train AI models unless creators actively opt out. This proposal aims to balance the interests of AI developers and content creators but has raised concerns about the potential impact on creators' rights and the need for effective mechanisms to manage opt-out requests and ensure fair compensation.

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score: 8

Notes: The narrative references ongoing legislative developments in the UK AI bill, with recent amendments moving to the House of Commons, indicating current and up-to-date events. Mention of recent protests from artists and statements from Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer support freshness. No indications of recycled or out-of-date content were found.

Quotes check

Score: 7

Notes: The narrative cites public figures like Elton John and Paul McCartney as signatories of a letter condemning the bill and references a silent protest album. While direct sourced quotes are not present, these references align with known recent events connected to the AI training data debate. Absence of direct earliest source quotations reduces score but suggests original reporting rather than recycled content.

Source reliability

Score: 6

Notes: The narrative originates from NewsBreak, a lesser-known digital news aggregator platform rather than a globally recognised reputable organisation. This lowers certainty about editorial standards and fact-checking rigor compared to outlets like BBC or Reuters. Claims are consistent with publicly known developments but source credibility is moderately uncertain.

Plausability check

Score: 9

Notes: The legislative process described, including the reversal of opt-out to opt-in permissions for AI training on copyright works, is plausible and reflects broader ongoing debates globally. Involvement of prominent cultural figures and institutions like the University of Cambridge further supports plausibility. No factual inconsistencies or improbabilities were detected.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM

Summary: The narrative presents a timely and plausible account of the UK's AI training data legislation undergoing amendment due to creative industry opposition. While direct quotations lack earliest sourcing and the platform is not highly renowned, the detail and coherence with known recent events support a largely accurate and fresh depiction of the topic.

UK AI legislation
copyright law
creative industry
artificial intelligence
intellectual property