TL;DR
The UK government has abandoned its preferred approach to AI copyright — which would have allowed tech firms to use copyrighted works unless rights holders opted out. Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said the government has “listened” but has no replacement policy, with four options still under consideration and no firm timeline for resolution.
What Changed and Why
The original proposal drew fierce opposition from across the creative sector. Sir Elton John called the government “absolute losers” over the plans, while Dua Lipa, Abba’s Bjorn Ulvaeus, Thom Yorke, and thousands of other artists voiced concerns. The backlash intensified after the government refused an amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill last June that would have forced tech firms to declare their use of copyrighted material.
Kendall’s announcement follows a formal consultation that confirmed overwhelming rejection of the opt-out model by creative organisations. Equity, the actors’ union, described the reversal as recognition that “selling out the UK’s creative industries to benefit US tech companies would’ve been an act of national self-sabotage.”
Four Options, No Decision
The government’s published update leaves four proposals on the table: leaving copyright law unchanged; requiring AI firms to licence copyrighted content; the now-deprioritised opt-out model; and a full waiver allowing AI companies unrestricted access with no opt-out.
An accompanying economic impact assessment acknowledged the tension but offered no costed analysis of each option. It noted that the UK creative sector is a “world-leading national asset” while the AI industry is growing “23 times faster than the rest of the economy.”
Composer and copyright campaigner Ed Newton-Rex warned the creative sector against celebrating too early: “Virtually everything is still on the table, including the opt-out. It’s just kicking the can down the road.”
What It Means for UK Tech and Creative Businesses
For AI startups, the uncertainty is a competitive risk. Antony Walker of techUK warned that with international competitors moving ahead, “the UK cannot afford for this to remain unresolved.” Meanwhile, the BPI’s Dr Jo Twist argued that allowing the licensing market to develop could let creativity and AI “go hand in hand.”
Kendall also announced a taskforce on AI content labelling, a consultation on deepfake protections for personal likeness, and a working group to support smaller creative organisations in licensing their content.
Looking Forward
The government has committed to not reforming copyright law “until we are confident” it will meet economic objectives. For UK businesses on both sides — AI firms needing training data and creatives protecting their livelihoods — the lack of a clear framework means continued uncertainty. The unresolved question of whether AI training constitutes fair use or theft of intellectual property will shape the UK’s position in the global AI race.