The AI copyright standoff continues - with no solution in sight
The fierce battle over artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright - which pits the government against some of the biggest names in the creative industry - returns to the House of Lords on Monday with little sign of a solution in sight.A huge row has kicked off between ministers and peers who back the artists, and shows no sign of abating. It might be about AI but at its heart are very human issues: jobs and creativity.It's highly unusual that neither side has backed down by now or shown any sign of compromise; in fact if anything support for those opposing the government is growing rather than tailing off. This is "unchartered territory", one source in the peers' camp told me.
The argument is over how best to balance the demands of two huge industries: the tech and creative sectors. More specifically, it's about the fairest way to allow AI developers access to creative content in order to make better AI tools - without undermining the livelihoods of the people who make that content in the first place.What's sparked it is the uninspiringly-titled Data (Use and Access) Bill.This proposed legislation was broadly expected to finish its long journey through parliament this week and sail off into the law books. Instead, it is currently stuck in limbo, ping-ponging between the House of Lords and the House of Commons.The bill states that AI developers should have access to all content unless its individual owners choose to opt out. Nearly 300 members of the House of Lords disagree. They think AI firms should be forced to disclose which copyrighted material they use to train their tools, with a view to licensing it.Sir Nick Clegg, former president of global affairs at Meta, is among those broadly supportive of the bill, arguing that asking permission from all copyright holders would "kill the AI industry in this country". Those against include Baroness Beeban Kidron, a crossbench peer and former film director, best known for making films such as Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason.She says ministers would be "knowingly throwing UK designers, artists, authors, musicians, media and nascent AI companies under the bus" if they don't move to protect their output from what she describes as "state sanctioned theft" from a UK industry worth £124bn.She's asking for an amendment to the bill which includes Technology Secretary Peter Kyle giving a report to the House of Commons about the impact of the new law on the creative industries, three months after it comes into force, if it doesn't change.
Mr Kyle also appears to have changed his views about UK copyright law.He once said copyright law was "very certain", now he says it is "not fit for purpose".Perhaps to an extent both those things are true.The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology say that they're carrying out a wider consultation on these issues and will not consider changes to the Bill unless they're completely satisfied that they work for creators. If the "ping pong" between the two Houses continues, there's a small chance the entire bill could be shelved; I'm told it's unlikely but not impossible.If it does, some other important elements would go along with it, simply because they are part of the same bill. It also includes proposed rules on the rights of bereaved parents to access their children's data if they die, changes to allow NHS trusts to share patient data more easily, and even a 3D underground map of the UK's pipes and cables, aimed at improving the efficiency of roadworks (I told you it was a big bill).There is no easy answer.
How did we get here?
Here's how it all started. Initially, before AI exploded into our lives, AI developers scraped enormous quantities of content from the internet, arguing that it was in the public domain already and therefore freely available. We are talking about big, mainly US, tech firms here doing the scraping, and not paying for anything they hoovered up.Then, they used that data to train the same AI tools now used by millions to write copy, create pictures and videos in seconds. These tools can also mimic popular musicians, writers, artists. For example, a recent viral trend saw people merrily sharing AI images generated in the style of the Japanese animation firm Studio Ghibli.The founder of that studio meanwhile, had once described the use of AI in animation as "an insult to life itself". Needless to say, he was not a fan.There has been a massive backlash from many content creators and owners including household names like Sir Elton John, Sir Paul McCartney and Dua Lipa. They have argued that taking their work in this way, without consent, credit or payment, amounted to theft. And that artists are now losing work because AI tools can churn out similar content freely and quickly instead.Sir Elton John didn't hold back in a recent interview with the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg. He argued that the government was on course to "rob young people of their legacy and their income", and described the current administration as "absolute losers".Others though point out that material made by the likes of Sir Elton is available worldwide. And if you make it too hard for AI companies to access it in the UK they'll simply do it elsewhere instead, taking much needed investment and job opportunities with them.Two opposing positions, no obvious compromise.
Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the world's top tech stories and trends. Outside the UK? Sign up here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
32 minutes ago
- BBC News
Donald Trump doubles US steel and aluminium tariffs to 50%
US President Donald Trump has signed an order doubling tariffs on steel and aluminium imports from 25% to 50%.The move hikes import taxes on the metals - key inputs in everything from cars to canned food - for the second time in three has said the measures, which come into effect on Thursday, are intended to secure the future of the American steel industry. However, critics say the protections could wreak havoc on steel producers outside the US, spark retaliation from trade partners, and come at a punishing cost for American users of the metals. Hours before he hiked the duties, many firms directly affected could scarcely believe the plan was moving forward, hoping it would turn out to be temporary or some kind of negotiating as Trump moved forward with the deal, the UK was granted a carve-out from the measures, leaving duties on its steel and aluminium at 25%, a move Trump said reflected its ongoing trade discussions with the US. "Always the question with Mr Trump is, is this a tactic or is this a long-term plan?" said Rick Heuther, chief executive of Independent Can Co, a Maryland-based business, which brings in steel from Europe and turns it into decorative cookie tins, popcorn boxes, and other said he had put investments on hold and feared the abrupt changes, and price increases would lead his customers to turn to alternatives such as plastic or paper boxes. "There's a lot of chaos," he said. The US is the biggest importer of steel in the world, after the European Union, getting most of the metal from Canada, Brazil, Mexico and South Korea, according to the US his first term, Trump imposed tariffs of 25% on steel and 10% on aluminium, citing a law that gives him authority to protect industries considered vital to national security. But many imports ultimately escaped the duties after the US struck trade deals with allies and granted exemptions to certain imports at the request of ended those carve-outs in March, saying he was unhappy with the way the protections had been weakened. At Friday's rally at the US Steel factory, he said wanted to make tariffs so high that US businesses would have no alternative but to buy from American suppliers."Nobody's going to get around that," he said of the 50% rate. "That means that nobody's going to be able to steal your industry. It's at 25% - they can get over that fence. At 50%, they can no longer get over the fence." Reaction in the UK and Europe As of May, imports and the rate of raw steel production in the US had changed little since last year before Trump raised tariffs, according to the American Iron and Steel Institute. But steel imports fell 17% in April, compared to March. And businesses selling the metals into the US said they expected Trump's latest announcement to lead to an even more dramatic drop. Trump's moves in March had already prompted Canada and the European Union to prepare to hit back with tariffs of their own American products. On Tuesday, Olof Gill, spokesperson for economic security and trade for the European Commission told the BBC the two sides were engaged in intense talks to try to make progress toward an agreement. "We're negotiating hard to try and make good deals," he said."We really hope that the Americans will roll back on this latest tariff threat, as they have done on others, but that remains to be seen." In the UK, Trump's announcement put new pressure on the government to pin down the trade deal in the works with the US, which had been expected to provide some protection from the March metals tariffs. Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds met with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer in Paris on Wednesday. His office said it was "pleased" that the trade talks had protected UK steel from the latest duties. "We will continue to work with the US to implement our agreement, which will see the 25% US tariffs on steel removed," he said. Gareth Stace, director general of UK Steel, which represents steelmakers, told the BBC that his members had already seen orders cancelled and delayed as a result of the 25% tariffs put in place in March. He warned that a 50% tariff would be "catastrophic" for UK exports to the US, about 7% of overall exports."The introduction of 50% tariffs immediately puts the shutters up," he said. "Most of our orders, if not all of them, will now be cancelled." Economists said the US economy is also facing damage, as prices rise as a result of the new measures. A 2020 analysis estimated that Trump's first term tariffs created roughly 1,000 jobs in the steel industry, but cost the economy 75,000 jobs in other sectors, such as manufacturing and York, vice president of federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation, said that she expected to see even more extreme job losses this time. "Some of the strongest evidence is against tariffs on intermediate inputs like steel and aluminium, finding they are much more harmful because they increase the cost of production in the United States," she said. "It's just very foolish to double down on this type of tariff in particular." Chad Bartusek is director of supply chain management at Drill Rod & Tool Steels, a small, family-owned manufacturing business in Illinois, which brings in about 800,000 pounds of Austrian-made steel each year, at specifications he says are not produced in the US. Mr Bartusek said he was currently waiting on three containers worth of steel rod, which would have entered the US without duties at the start of the of last week, he had expected to pay tariff costs about $72,000. Instead, he is looking at a tariff bill of almost $145,000. "I woke up Saturday morning, looked at the news and my jaw dropped," he said of Trump's announcement. Mr Bartusek said business had been steady until a few weeks ago. But his firm raised prices earlier this year by 8% to 14% to help cover the new cost of the tariffs. Now customers have been ordering more cautiously and he has had to cut back hours for workers. "It's one punch after the other," he said. "Hopefully, this settles down quickly."
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump ally Lindsey Graham calls out Elon Musk 'bull****' after tech titan throws his credibility under the bus
Senator Lindsey Graham snapped back at billionaire Tesla CEO and X owner Elon Musk, after the tech titan shared a post alleging he was responsible for nearly a million dollars in spending on hotel rooms in Ukraine. Graham, R-S.C., landed in hot water with former top Trump White House ally Elon Musk Tuesday afternoon in a spectacular clash on social media. Musk reposted a tweet which accused Graham of spending $400,000 on hotel rooms in Ukraine. Social media influencer Nick Sortor made the original post with the allegations, which has amassed over 10 million views since just before 11 a.m. Tuesday morning. 'People love whining in my comment section when I say Congress takes a lot of vacations: 'They're not on vacation. They're working in their districts!' 'BULL****. Lindsey Graham was just PARTYING IN UKRAINE on OUR DIME. When did Lindsey Graham become the Senator from Ukraine??!' Sorotor concluded. Sortor's post also included a video of Senator Graham and Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) shaking hands with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy over the weekend in Kiyv. A screenshot of a spending disbursement of $411,634 made by the U.S. Department of State to an organization in Ukraine, the International - Business Center Tov was also included in Sortor's post. Musk reposted Sortor's post, adding 'Why is the hotel bill so high? The room service must be incredible!' Graham fired back at the allegations Tuesday afternoon with his own X post. 'Fake news. More BS. I'm all-in trying to help President @realDonaldTrump end this war — and making sure Putin doesn't win. This isn't a travel expense report. It's a monthly contract between the State Department for U.S. diplomats in a war zone — nothing to do with my trip' Graham tweeted from his official government account. Fake news. More BS. I'm all-in trying to help President @realDonaldTrump end this war — and making sure Putin doesn't win. This isn't a travel expense report. It's a monthly contract between the State Department for U.S. diplomats in a war zone — nothing to do with my trip. — Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) June 3, 2025 Per data available on USA Spending, the International - Business Center Tov has received $8.59 million marked as hotel spending. The group has received money from the American government in 2023, 2024, and 2025. While the allegations continued to gain steam on social media Tuesday, Musk's own Grok AI classified the X boss's claims as misinformation. 'There's no evidence supporting claims of GOP spending on luxury hotels in Ukraine; such narratives may stem from misinformation. The idea that Congress spends 60% of their time on vacation is exaggerated, as they work about 133 days in session, with other time often spent on district duties,' a Grok reply to a post made by X user Matt Van Swol reads. @matt_vanswol is expressing frustration over the GOP's failure to act on proposed spending cuts by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), linked to Elon Musk and the Trump administration. There's no evidence supporting claims of GOP spending on luxury hotels in Ukraine;… — Grok (@grok) June 3, 2025 Senator Graham has been one of Ukraine's most vocal advocates throughout the course of the nation's war with Russia, taking several trips to the country in recent years. Former White House strategist Steve Bannon accused Graham of working against the wishes of President Trump during his trips on an episode of his War Room podcast, which aired Monday. 'The White House has to condemn this immediately and pull all support and tell Lindsey Graham to come home or we are going to put you under arrest when you come home. You're stirring it up,' Bannon said.
Glasgow Times
34 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Al Qaida terrorists tried to poison UK water supply, says ex-security minister
Details of the foiled 2008 extremist plot were given by Lord West of Spithead, who was in office at the time, as the Government was tackled at Westminster over steps to protect the Britain's reservoirs against attack by hostile forces. It follows the publication of comprehensive military plans to safeguard the UK in the face of threats from Vladimir Putin's Russia and China. Sir Keir Starmer said the strategic defence review (SDR), published earlier this week, would create a 'battle-ready, armour-clad' nation. The move comes against the backdrop of ongoing concerns about the vulnerability of critical national infrastructure to attack. Pressed in Parliament over whether there had ever been an attempt or a plan uncovered to contaminate the UK's water supply, environment minister Baroness Hayman of Ullock said: 'My understanding is that there has not been such an incident, but that does not mean that we should be complacent. 'We know that our water and energy infrastructure are both potentially vulnerable to hostile attacks.' But moving to correct his frontbench colleague, Lord West, who served as Home Office minister for security and counter-terrorism from 2007 to 2010, said: 'In 2008 there was an attempt by eight al Qaida operatives to poison north London water supplies. 'I am pleased to say that our agencies worked brilliantly to stop it happening.' Lord West of Spithead sits on Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee (David Mirzoeff/PA) The former Navy chief, who sits on Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, added: 'As a result, in the Home Office we put in hand a whole series of work on police response times, indicators of where the outflows from reservoirs went and new barriers. 'Where has all that work gone? These things somehow seem to disappear. There should be some reports, and hopefully someone did something about it.' Responding, Lady Hayman said: 'That is extremely interesting and very helpful of my noble friend. I will certainly look into it, because it is an important point.' Earlier, the minister told peers: 'The Government's first duty is to protect our national security and keep our country safe. 'Defra (the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) recognises that the drinking water supply is a potential target for hostile actors. 'It works with water companies and partners across Government to understand and monitor threats to water supply and to consider responses as appropriate to protect the security of our water system.' But Labour peer Lord Harris of Haringey, who is chairman of the National Preparedness Commission, said: 'I wonder whether her department is being a tad complacent in talking simply about monitoring the threat rather than looking at what practical arrangements can be made. 'For example, how do we deal with a drone which is flown over a reservoir and deposits something in there? 'The panic effects of that being known to have happened and not necessarily knowing what the substance is would be enormous.' Lady Hayman said: 'Tackling the diverse range of state threats – not just drones but many other threats – requires a cross-government and cross-society response. 'We need to draw on the skills, the resources and the remits of different departments and operational partners. 'In Defra, we work closely to look at the threats and the appropriate levels of response, specifically drawing on expert advice from the National Protective Security Authority, the National Cyber Security Centre and the Home Office, as well as carrying out threat assessment with policing partners.' Former Metropolitan Police chief Lord Hogan-Howe, who led the UK's largest force from 2011 to 2017, said: 'For about 15 years, I have been worried about the water supply – the large and small reservoirs, the pipes that connect them and, of course, the water treatment plants. 'I worry that there is sometimes confusion between the Home Office, Defra and others about who is looking after security.' The independent crossbencher added: 'It needs to be higher in the priorities than it presently appears.' In reply, the minister said: 'I can assure him that we discuss these matters with the Home Office. 'One thing that we have been trying hard to do in Defra and other departments since we came into government is to work better across Government.' The Home Office has been contacted for comment.
