BPI’s Head of Policy and Public Affairs, Beth Sidwell gives an overview of latest activity in relation to copyright and AI

Following the closure of the UK Government consultation on ‘Copyright and Artificial Intelligence’, BPI has been continuing to raise awareness with Parliamentarians (i.e. Members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords) about our concerns, as well as bring pressure upon the Government to change its position.

There has been continuing media attention on this topic, including coverage of music stars such as Elton John and others speaking out. This has come alongside the Government facing significant opposition from Parliamentarians during the passage of the ‘Data (Use and Access) Bill’, a piece of legislation which is not primarily about AI but has been used to raise concerns about AI companies use of creative content without authorisation.

Creative industries champion, Baroness Kidron OBE and supportive MPs have been working with the industry to place amendments on this Bill, which would commit the Government to introducing important transparency measures in relation to AI model training. These amendments have had broad support from cross-party MPs and Peers in the Lords, as well as the creative industries, and have resulted in a legislative ‘ping-pong’ between both Houses, as the Government removes these amendments in the Commons and the Lords continues to add them. 

The Government’s position is that it does not wish to legislate AI in a “piecemeal” fashion and would prefer to introduce a dedicated AI Bill, which would come later in the Parliament. However, the nature of the strength of opposition presented has meant the Government has had to change its position. Firstly, it has now said that unlike its stated position in the consultation document, the Government no longer has a “preferred option” in relation to copyright and AI and is instead “open-minded” about how it takes this forward. This is seems comes in recognition of the strong opposition vocalised through the consultation responses received, with Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology Peter Kyle MP saying:  "When we went into the consultation, I believed that opting out could have offered an opportunity to bring both sides together, but I now accept that that is not the case."

Secondly, the Government has now committed to conduct an economic impact assessment of changes to copyright law and a report on the use of copyright works in the development of AI systems. Despite being presented as so, these are not concessions and are measures that BPI and the wider creative industries would already have expected the Government to undertake. BPI’s CSO, Sophie Jones responded publicly along these lines. Lastly, following the conclusion of this Bill, the Government has said that it will convene working groups with the creative and AI industries on transparency, licensing and other related issues. BPI is anticipating representation on these groups although no further information has been shared.

Although these developments sound somewhat positive, the Government’s lack of commitment to introduce tangible transparency measures which would help facilitate licensing is a sign that there are still challenges for the music industry in this debate and campaigning on this issue must continue.

BPI activity  

The BPI team has continued our presence as a leading voice in this debate, including a visible presence through the media, in Parliament and in conversations with Government. Most recently this has included:

 

There is still time for you to engage your MP in this debate and share your concerns about the impact of generative-AI on your business. Please find resources on how to do this here.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss this or other activity further, then please contact the Public Affairs team via [email protected].