There is no doubt that artificial intelligence will unlock huge gains in society, but behind AI models are massive datasets not built on transparency and trust, but on the unpaid labour of creators. Entire creations and careers are copied and remixed into data while the original human creator and rights owner is left out of the conversation entirely.
The mission for creative industries cannot mean creative industry submission. The opportunity plan will not work if creative industries are the opportunity cost. Creative industries must not be expected to forfeit legal rights for uncertainty.
This is a pivotal moment. Rapid technological change is reshaping life as we know it. The extraordinary potential of artificial intelligence must be built on integrity. The decisions made now will determine whether progress comes at the dismantling or destruction of a sector already giving Britain substantial economic, cultural and social capital here and around the world.
As sponsor of the recent Westminster Hall debate on the impact of AI on intellectual property, I witnessed just how critical this issue has become. Over 90 minutes we heard from nearly 30 speakers contributing. With standing room only for stakeholders, the scale of interest was undeniable. It was a powerful reminder that this debate is not theoretical — it is about real people, real jobs and the future of a sector that defines the UK on the global stage.
In preparing for that debate, more than 200 individuals and organisations reached out to me directly, sharing first-hand experiences — from world-renowned creatives to small independent voices. Many were deeply personal accounts, full of anxiety about the threat posed to livelihoods. Echoed by the government’s own consultation, which received over 12,000 responses. The strength of feeling across the board shows exactly why this moment matters.
The UK is a creative superpower. Cultural exports are world-class. Intellectual property industries are high-value, high-skill and globally admired. The economic might and strength of creative industries must not be overlooked. Copyright is the foundation to creations, industry and livelihoods across music, films, books, news investigations, coding, games, paintings and more.
This is not a crisis of legislation. UK copyright law is clear. If someone uses work without permission, it is infringement. The problem is not uncertainty in the law, it is opacity in the technology. Rights-holders cannot see what has been used. There is no attribution and no recompense to the content and resource these machines are built with and from.
Transparency must be granular, enforceable and practical. AI developers must be required to disclose which copyrighted works have been used to train or fine-tune models. Industrial scale, unregulated scraping is not innovation, it is infringement. It erodes the commercial certainty that serious investors need.
There must be an assertion of first principles and economic fairness. An honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work. The cost of doing business and paying your way. The loudest AI tech companies expect to train machines on created content for nothing. A warehouse trading in stolen guitars or paintings would never be tolerated, but in digital form online, theft is expected.
Copyright is not an obstacle, it is infrastructure. It underpins the £124 billion contribution to UK plc. Weakening it with vague exceptions or opt-out regimes violates international copyright norms, undermines international relations and investment, sees capital take flight and causes economic damage. Creators must not have to exert rights for them to exist or have to sue to keep them.
AI models used in national security, science or healthcare do not require creative content to function. If creative content is essential for generative AI, then it should be paid for.
There is little faith in an opt-out model or any strategic direction placing the burden on individual creators to prevent their work being taken by tech. A technical solution to make opt-outs meaningful does not exist. Worldwide, there is no comparable territory where this is settled. No functioning rights reservation has emerged in the EU. In the US, litigation fervour is rife. California has a carve-out.
The chancellor and government’s leadership are right to propose the UK on the world stage as a safe and certain bet for investment. New growth has to ensure net growth.
The government’s engagement with me and those I’m working with on this issue has been very good. My honest challenge — shared by countless others — is to influence the government’s policy position for the good of the law to come. It feels like we are making progress, and we must. The stakes are too high to fall short.
There are exciting growth opportunities in the emerging AI licensing sector that demonstrate copyright is well understood with scalable possibilities for licensing and ethical AI in the UK. Platforms such as Created by Humans, Narrativ, Prorata, Getty Images, Musiio, Adobe, WeAreHumain and partnerships between major creative companies and AI developers all point to licensing models built on transparency, consent, copyright and compensation.
This is not about putting AI and creativity in opposition because we must strike the right balance. If rights that protect creators are eroded, the risk is not only economic loss but the strangulation of voices that tell stories, reflect struggles and inspire futures. Algorithms may calculate, but human creativity pours heart, history, hope and the human into every note, frame and story.
The UK must value not just innovation but the human spirit behind creativity and protect the rights that mean society thrives — for now and for generations yet to imagine, dream and create.
Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.
