Government Drops AI Copyright Plans After Creative Industry Backlash

The UK government has abandoned its proposed approach to AI and copyright, admitting that it no longer has a clear path forward after widespread opposition from artists, musicians and publishers.

Technology Secretary Liz Kendall confirmed on Wednesday that the government had dropped its previous position, which would have allowed AI companies to train their models on copyrighted material with an opt-out mechanism for creators, following a consultation that revealed that the plan was overwhelmingly rejected by the creative sector. "We have listened," Kendall said, adding that the government would take time to "get this right."

The change follows a high-profile campaign from British artists including Sir Elton John and Dua Lipa, who argued that the original proposal amounted to legalised theft of their work. Sir Elton had told the BBC it was like "committing theft, thievery on a high scale."

But the government's new position offers little clarity on what comes next. Kendall said the government "no longer has a preferred option" and would not reform copyright laws "until we are confident that they will meet our objectives for the economy and UK citizens." A government report published Wednesday acknowledged that there was "no consensus on how these objectives should be achieved."

UK Music chief executive Tom Kiehl called the development "a major victory for campaigners," while Publishers Association president Mandy Hill said it was a victory "over the self-interest of a handful of large corporations." However, Hill cautioned that the door had not been fully closed on allowing tech firms to use copyrighted content without a licence, adding: "The existing law is clear. Copyright material cannot be used for AI development and training without permission."

Copyright expert Louise Popple of law firm Taylor Wessing said that the government's position left significant ambiguity. "That's a subtle difference of approach and could be interpreted to mean that everything is still up for grabs," she said. "It feels very much like the hard issues are being kicked down the road by the government."

The government's next steps will look at mandatory labelling of AI-generated content to protect consumers from disinformation and deepfakes, ways to tackle non-consensual digital replicas, and better support for independent creative organisations.

The tension at the heart of the issue is significant. The government's own impact assessment described UK culture as "a world-leading national asset" while noting that the AI sector is growing "23 times faster than the rest of the economy", with the UK having the third largest AI industry in the world after the US and China. 

Anthony Walker of Tech UK warned that the uncertainty carried real economic risk: "The UK has set its sights on leading the G7 in AI adoption, but that requires a clear and enabling framework for AI innovation. With international competitors moving ahead, the UK cannot afford for this to remain unresolved."

Vinous Ali of the Startup Coalition echoed that concern, saying it was disappointing that "a more concrete way" forward had not been found, adding: "It is critical we find a workable solution that allows our AI startups to go toe to toe with competitors operating in more enabling environments."

The Musicians' Union called for collective licensing schemes that would protect individual artists rather than "just major rights holders," while Kiehl said the 220,000 people working in the UK music sector, which generates £8bn for the economy, "should be entitled to work and earn a living without the constant fear that the fruits of their labour could effectively be taken by AI firms without payment or permission."