Politics

UK public rejects move to relax copyright rules for AI training

Monday, 15 December 2025 6:28PM UTC

The UK public overwhelmingly oppose proposals that would allow AI firms broader access to copyrighted material without licences, highlighting industry concerns over creator rights amid government consultations.

The UK public has overwhelmingly rejected proposals from the Labour government's consultation that would have allowed AI firms broader access to copyrighted material without mandatory licences, according to reporting of the consultation's findings. The Daily Mail reported that just 3% of respondents backed a government-favoured "opt-out" approach for the creative industries, while 88% supported strengthening copyright by requiring companies to pay for licences and a further 7% favoured maintaining existing protections. ^[1]

Those responses underline deep concern across the creative sector about how large technology companies use online text, images and music to train generative AI models without paying or crediting creators. The original report, as described in coverage, said musicians including Sir Elton John, Sir Paul McCartney and Kate Bush, together with actors and publishers, criticised the plans; industry groups urged the government to abandon any new exception that would permit unfunded use. ^[1]

The government has been running a formal consultation to balance the interests of creators and AI developers, exploring options such as licensing frameworks, transparency requirements about training data, and protections to ensure creators can be compensated for use of their work. According to the consultation documents, ministers say they aim to "protect creative works, whilst also ensuring the UK reaps the transformational benefits of AI and keeps our place as one of the world's top innovators and economies." ^[2]^[7]

Industry and parliamentary actors have responded with calls for stronger safeguards. Two cross‑party committees emphasised the need for fair remuneration and improved transparency around the datasets used to train models, warning against adopting the government's preferred option without workable technical solutions. Chi Onwurah, chair of the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, has written to major AI firms including Google and OpenAI seeking clarity on their consultation responses and data practices. The committees' interventions reflect concern that the consultation process must deliver protections that are enforceable in practice. ^[6]^[5]

Critics also argue the consultation process itself has at times appeared skewed towards the interests of AI companies. Film‑maker and crossbench peer Beeban Kidron told The Guardian she believes the proposals risk transferring wealth from the creative industries to the tech sector and questioned the fairness and transparency of the review. That viewpoint sits alongside repeated defeats in the House of Lords over attempts to enshrine stronger transparency and copyright safeguards, including amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill. Peers have pressed for requirements that rights holders be informed when their work is used to train models. ^[3]^[4]

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said the consultation attracted so many responses that an 80‑civil‑servant taskforce was established to analyse them; the department has stated it will provide a detailed summary of responses on each option and technical area as part of its ongoing reporting. The consultation coverage shows both the creative industries and the tech sector broadly agree that any future change should minimise unnecessary red tape, even as they remain deeply divided over how rights and payments should operate in practice. The government said it is "continuing to consider all options." ^[1]^[2]^[7]

As the debate continues, industry bodies urged clear action. Owen Meredith of the News Media Association called for the government to "definitively rule out any new copyright exception, bringing an end to the uncertainty created by this prolonged process," arguing licensing would unlock investment and strengthen the market for high‑quality content. Sophie Jones of the BPI said it was "imperative" the government drops a Text and Data Mining exception as "unnecessary and harmful to the UK's creative industries and jobs it supports." Campaigners for fair AI compensation described the consultation results as an "overwhelming repudiation" of the government's previously preferred option. These voices frame the policy choice as one between preserving existing copyright protections coupled with licensing and transparency, or loosening rules in ways critics say would disadvantage creators. ^[1]

##Reference Map:

^[1] (Daily Mail) - Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 7
^[2] (GOV.UK consultation page) - Paragraph 3, Paragraph 7
^[7] (GOV.UK news) - Paragraph 3, Paragraph 7
^[6] (Science, Innovation and Technology Committee) - Paragraph 4
^[5] (Science, Innovation and Technology Committee) - Paragraph 4
^[3] (The Guardian) - Paragraph 5
^[4] (Evening Standard) - Paragraph 5

Source: Noah Wire Services

More on this

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15385743/Own-goal-Labour-Governments-AI-report-finds-majority-support-strengthening-copyright-law.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490 - Please view link - unable to able to access data
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/copyright-and-artificial-intelligence - The UK government has initiated a consultation to address the challenges posed by artificial intelligence (AI) on copyright laws. The consultation seeks to balance the interests of creative industries and AI developers by exploring options such as allowing AI companies to use copyrighted material with proper licensing, requiring transparency from AI developers about the data used to train models, and ensuring that creators have control over their works and can be compensated for their use. The consultation aims to support innovation while protecting the rights of creators.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/feb/11/uk-copyright-law-consultation-fixed-favour-ai-firms-peer-says - Beeban Kidron, a crossbench peer and film-maker, has criticised the UK government's consultation on changes to copyright law, alleging that it is biased in favour of AI companies. She argues that the proposals would lead to a significant transfer of wealth from the creative industries to the tech sector and undermine the government's growth agenda. Kidron questions the fairness of the consultation process and calls for greater transparency and protection for creators.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson-government-labour-paul-mccartney-elton-john-b1228655.html - The UK government has faced repeated defeats in the House of Lords over copyright protections against AI. Peers have supported amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill, aiming to introduce transparency requirements to ensure that copyright holders are aware of when and how their work is used by AI companies. This reflects ongoing concerns from artists and musicians about the use of their copyrighted material without permission or compensation.
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/135/science-innovation-and-technology-committee/news/205778/sitc-chair-writes-to-google-and-openai-on-issue-of-ai-and-copyright/ - Chi Onwurah, chair of the UK Parliament's Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, has written to Google and OpenAI seeking information on their responses to the government's consultation on AI and copyright. The letters aim to clarify the positions of these major AI companies regarding the use of copyrighted material in AI training and to ensure that their practices align with the government's objectives for a fair and transparent rights environment.
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/135/science-innovation-and-technology-committee/news/205480/two-crossparty-committees-respond-to-government-consultation-on-artificial-intelligence-and-copyright/ - Two cross-party UK parliamentary committees have responded to the government's consultation on AI and copyright, emphasising the need for fair remuneration for creative work. They call for practical measures to improve transparency around the data used to train AI models and caution against proceeding with the government's preferred option without a workable technical solution. The committees stress the importance of balancing the interests of AI developers and rights holders.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-consults-on-proposals-to-give-creative-industries-and-ai-developers-clarity-over-copyright-laws - The UK government has launched a consultation to provide clarity over how copyright laws apply to the use of creative works in AI development. The proposals aim to support both the creative industries and AI developers by ensuring that creators have control over their works and can be compensated for their use, while also allowing AI developers access to high-quality data for training models. The consultation seeks to balance the interests of both sectors to foster innovation and protect creators' rights.

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 a government consultation on AI and copyright, which closed on 25 February 2025. The Daily Mail article was published on 15 December 2025, indicating a reporting delay of approximately 9 months. This suggests the content may be recycled or based on earlier reports. The consultation's findings were likely available before the article's publication, raising concerns about the freshness of the information. Additionally, the article includes updated data but recycles older material, which may justify a higher freshness score but should still be flagged. The narrative also cites a press release from the government, which typically warrants a high freshness score. However, the significant delay between the consultation's closure and the article's publication is concerning.

Quotes check

Score: 7

Notes: The article includes direct quotes from industry figures and government representatives. However, without access to the original sources, it's challenging to verify the authenticity and context of these quotes. The absence of direct links to the original statements raises concerns about the accuracy and reliability of the quoted material.

Source reliability

Score: 6

Notes: The narrative originates from the Daily Mail, a reputable UK newspaper. However, the significant delay between the consultation's closure and the article's publication raises questions about the timeliness and relevance of the information presented. The reliance on a press release from the government adds credibility but also suggests the article may be based on official statements without independent verification.

Plausability check

Score: 7

Notes: The claims about the government's consultation and the support for strengthening copyright law align with known government initiatives. However, the lack of specific details, such as the exact findings of the consultation and the names of the industry figures quoted, makes it difficult to fully assess the plausibility of the narrative. The absence of supporting details from other reputable outlets further raises questions about the completeness and accuracy of the information presented.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): FAIL

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM

Summary: The narrative presents information about a government consultation on AI and copyright, but the significant delay between the consultation's closure and the article's publication, along with the lack of specific details and verifiable sources, raises concerns about the freshness, accuracy, and reliability of the content. The reliance on a press release without independent verification further diminishes the credibility of the report.

AI
Copyright
Creative Industries