UK Government To Weigh Artists' Rights Amid AI copyright Dispute
A shift in tone from the UK government on its approach to addressing artists' concerns about AI-driven copyright infringement has been signaled by Technology Secretary Liz Kendall. In remarks that appear to diverge from her predecessor, Peter Kyle's stance, Kendall indicated sympathy for artists seeking fair compensation for their work when it is used without permission by companies leveraging large language models.
"We need to find a way that both sectors can grow and thrive in the future," she stated, emphasizing the importance of paying creators for their work. This approach marks a significant departure from Kyle's original intention, which aimed to require artists to actively opt out of having their work incorporated into AI systems.
The UK government has been engaging in consultations on an overhaul of intellectual property regulations for artificial intelligence (AI). The proposed framework necessitates vast amounts of training data for these models to operate effectively. The contentious issue has sparked heated protests from renowned British artists, including Paul McCartney and Kate Bush, who have called for the government to take immediate action.
Elton John recently criticized the UK government's stance, labeling them "absolute losers." In contrast, Kendall expressed her commitment to engaging with both the creative sector and AI companies in a collaborative effort. By doing so, she hopes to establish a new balance that benefits both parties.
Campaigners for artists' rights have long argued that their work should not be used as training data without permission or fair compensation. This is reflected in a recent $1.5 billion settlement by Anthropic, one of the world's largest AI companies, which resulted in the release of a searchable database containing information on 500,000 books used to train its models.
However, some have questioned whether this development has effectively addressed concerns over transparency and fair compensation for creators. Beeban Kidron, a film director and crossbench peer, welcomed Kendall's efforts but stressed that the government must regain trust with the creative community and the public by taking concrete actions.
The UK government is expected to release an initial report on its plans before the end of the year, followed by a more substantial report by March 2026. As negotiations continue, Kendall remains committed to finding a solution that balances the needs of both creators and AI companies.
A shift in tone from the UK government on its approach to addressing artists' concerns about AI-driven copyright infringement has been signaled by Technology Secretary Liz Kendall. In remarks that appear to diverge from her predecessor, Peter Kyle's stance, Kendall indicated sympathy for artists seeking fair compensation for their work when it is used without permission by companies leveraging large language models.
"We need to find a way that both sectors can grow and thrive in the future," she stated, emphasizing the importance of paying creators for their work. This approach marks a significant departure from Kyle's original intention, which aimed to require artists to actively opt out of having their work incorporated into AI systems.
The UK government has been engaging in consultations on an overhaul of intellectual property regulations for artificial intelligence (AI). The proposed framework necessitates vast amounts of training data for these models to operate effectively. The contentious issue has sparked heated protests from renowned British artists, including Paul McCartney and Kate Bush, who have called for the government to take immediate action.
Elton John recently criticized the UK government's stance, labeling them "absolute losers." In contrast, Kendall expressed her commitment to engaging with both the creative sector and AI companies in a collaborative effort. By doing so, she hopes to establish a new balance that benefits both parties.
Campaigners for artists' rights have long argued that their work should not be used as training data without permission or fair compensation. This is reflected in a recent $1.5 billion settlement by Anthropic, one of the world's largest AI companies, which resulted in the release of a searchable database containing information on 500,000 books used to train its models.
However, some have questioned whether this development has effectively addressed concerns over transparency and fair compensation for creators. Beeban Kidron, a film director and crossbench peer, welcomed Kendall's efforts but stressed that the government must regain trust with the creative community and the public by taking concrete actions.
The UK government is expected to release an initial report on its plans before the end of the year, followed by a more substantial report by March 2026. As negotiations continue, Kendall remains committed to finding a solution that balances the needs of both creators and AI companies.
. But seriously, artists need some decent pay for their work 
. It's not too much to ask, right? 
Kendall seems like a good fit for this issue 
. I mean, 1.5 billion settlement is a big deal $1.5Billion 
. Artists should be able to decide who gets to use their work without permission 
. Trust the creatives to do what's best for them, right? 
#ArtistsRightsMatter. The whole thing with AI and copyright is just so weird... like how can you own a piece of code? 
It's not like they're selling a physical product or something, right? But at the same time, I get why creators need to be compensated for their work 
#FairCompensationForArtists.
and I don't blame him. And poor Paul McCartney is also speaking out about this... he's always been a strong advocate for artists' rights 
#RespectTheArtists.
#BalanceIsKey. I hope they can get it together soon, we need more transparency in this whole AI copyright thing 
#TransparencyMatters.
#WatchThisSpace.
They're all about profit over people! The fact that artists like Paul McCartney and Kate Bush are already speakin out against the government's stance is a major win for them, but it's not enough! We need real change, not some watered down compromise. I mean, come on Elton John saying they're "losers" was so refreshing, even if he didn't go about it in the most classy way 
.
. Let's hope the gov delivers on their promises 
.
.
. And, honestly, I'm loving how she's not just listening to the concerns of one side or the other – she's trying to have a conversation with both parties 
.
. But let's be real, it's still not enough 
. Bring on those reports, Kendall! 
. Will the government's efforts to engage with AI companies be enough to regain trust with the creative community and the public? 
Only time will tell if Kendall's commitment pays off 
.
. I mean, $1.5 billion settlement from Anthropic isn't bad, but 500k books is still a lot to handle 
.
beeban kidron's right tho, gov needs to take action not just words 
can't wait for that initial report in 2025 
and her approach might just lead to a better outcome for everyone involved 
but artists gotta be paid for their work, you feel? I think Liz Kendall's on the right track by listenin' to the creatives and tryin' to find a balance between them and these big tech companies. It's all about fairness, innit? Can't just use someone's work without givin' 'em the credit or the cash they deserve. Elton John might've called 'em "losers" but I think he's bein' harsh, yeah? Kendall's tryin' to make it work for everyone, even if it takes a little time and effort. Let's hope she succeeds and we can all enjoy some sick tunes and movies without the artists losin' out 
! Artists need to get paid for their work when it's used without permission 
. It's not fair that companies just use their stuff as training data for these large language models 
. But I guess Liz Kendall trying to help, she wants a balance between creators and AI companies 
. Maybe if they made it easy for artists to report when their work is used without permission, that would be a good start 
.
I just hope these talks don't drag on forever and that we get a fair deal for artists soon 
But what exactly does that mean? Are we talking about more artists getting paid for their work, or just a fancy new system for dealing with copyright infringement?
But at the same time, you've got people like Elton John saying some pretty harsh stuff... what's going on there?