The Government’s plans for solving the conundrum of how to balance the interests of copyright holders with the interests of AI developers has suffered a setback, as the House of Lords introduced a series of amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill designed to bolster the position of copyright holders.

We have discussed the Government’s long-awaited proposals here. A consultation, launched at the end of last year, proposed what is effectively an ‘opt-out’ system whereby AI developers would be able to train their models on copyright-protected content unless the owner has reserved their rights.

Already, there has been considerable pushback to these proposals from the creative industries. Paul McCartney recently expressed his concern that changes to copyright law could “rip off” artists, and some 40,000 people, among them household names in the worlds of art, literature, music, and drama, have signed a statement that “the unlicensed use of creative works for training generative AI is a major, unjust threat to the livelihoods of the people behind those works, and must not be permitted”.

A number of members of the House of Lords echoed these sentiments during the Report stage of the Data (Use and Access) Bill. In particular, Baroness Kidron delivered a speech in which she argued that the Government’s proposals will “transfer [copyright owners’] hard-earned property from them to another sector without compensation, and with it their possibility of a creative life, or a creative life for the next generation”.

Whilst the speech was a blistering attack on the Government’s approach in this area, Baroness Kidron was keen to stress that she accepted there was a need to make the copyright regime fit for the age of the AI. However, to her, the way to achieve that was not to proceed with the Government’s proposals, but rather to introduce a series of measures that protected the rights of copyright holders and imposed further transparency requirements on AI developers.

To this end, Baroness Kidron introduced a series of amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill which, to the surprise of some, were passed. The amendments can be read in full here, but Baroness Kidron summarised their intended effect as follows:

“These amendments set out how a copyright regime could work. Amendment 61 would ensure that all operators of web crawlers must comply with UK law if they are marketed in the UK. Amendments 62 and 63 would require operators to be transparent about their identity and purpose, and allow creatives to understand if their content had been stolen. Amendment 64 would give enforcement powers to the ICO and allow for a private right of action by copyright holders. Amendment 44A would require the ICO to report on its enforcement record. Finally, Amendment 65 would require the Secretary of State to review technical solutions that might support a strong copyright regime. These are practical, sensible amendments that could support a valuable industry while looking forward to new technical efficiencies as they emerge”.

The Bill has now moved to the House of Commons and will receive its Second Reading this week.