UK copyright law ‘likely to be modified’ to address AI issues

Minister for AI and IP predicts changes to legislation will form part of eventual solution | Members of the House of Lords urged the government to take a position swiftly.

Viscount Camrose, the UK minister for artificial intelligence (AI) and IP, has said that modifications to UK copyright law are likely to be part of the solution to balance AI innovation with protecting the rights of the creative industries.

Camrose made the comment yesterday, May 9,in response to an oral question tabled in the House of Lords by Lord Chris Holmes of Richmond (pictured above), who asked the government what steps it is taking to protect IP rights in relation to AI—in particular large language models—since discontinuing plans to develop a code of practice.

Having acknowledged the complexities of the issue, Camrose said that ultimately his “crystal ball” prediction would be that the solution would involve three elements.

Firstly, it would require some modifications to copyright legislation; secondly, the use of technology to enable a resolution; and thirdly, internationally accepted standards of interoperability for any eventual regime.

The minister also said that the laws surrounding the copyright protection of machine-generated content were getting “fairly elderly” and would need to be looked at.

Holmes has introduced a private members’ bill, the Artificial Intelligence (Regulation) Bill, which has a clause dedicated to transparency, IP obligations and labelling.

In consulting on this aspect of the bill, Holmes met with 25 organisations representing all parts of the creative industry, which he said want to be part of the development of AI but in a consented, negotiated and paid-for manner.

Pointing to the billions of pounds contributed by the creative industries to the UK economy, Holmes asked the UK minister for AI and IP why the government was content for their work, IP and copyright to be “so disrespected, so unprotected, in the face of AI?”

Government urged to ‘take a position’

Holmes’ concerns were echoed by Baroness Tina Stowell of Beeston, who said that the government’s reluctance to take a clear position on copyright in the context of AI and LLMs was leading to problematic business models becoming entrenched and normalised.

“It is urgent that the government takes a position clearly, and soon,” she said.

Baroness Margaret Jones of Whitchurch acknowledged the opportunity AI can offer creatives—for example, musician Randy Travis recently releasing a song with AI-generated vocals a decade after suffering a serious stroke—but pointed to widespread misuse.

“AI tools are being widely used to create music in the style of established artists despite no permission having been given and a total lack of creative control from those artists and their representatives,” she told the House of Lords.

Jurisdictional issues

In response to the concerns raised, Camrose said the government strongly supported AI innovation in the UK but that it could not be at the expense of the creative industries.

“Our goal is that both sectors should be able to grow together in partnership. We are currently working with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport to develop a way forward on copyright and AI,” he said.

Camrose highlighted the jurisdictional problems regarding potential IP infringements through AI, and said that no jurisdiction had yet identified a truly satisfactory solution.

He said the UK was working with the World Intellectual Property Organization and UN’s International Telecommunication Union to address the issue, and co-hosting the AI Seoul Summit later this month to advance global discussions on AI.