Latest news with #BaronessKidron
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
Starmer rejects fresh attempt to protect artists against AI
Sir Keir Starmer has rejected a third attempt by the House of Lords to introduce protections against AI for the creative industries, sparking fury from campaigners. The Government instructed Labour MPs to vote against an amendment to its Data (Use and Access) Bill on Tuesday, despite pleas from musicians, artists and authors to do more to protect them. Ministers have said they will not support an amendment by Baroness Kidron, a crossbench peer and filmmaker, which would require AI companies to inform creatives if their work was used to train machines to produce content. Her campaign has been backed by more than 400 industry figures, including Sir Elton John, Robbie Williams and Dame Shirley Bassey, alongside groups representing a variety of creative arts. On Wednesday, Sir Chris Bryant, a culture minister, said the Government would not support a requirement in Baroness Kidron's amendment that would have forced ministers to act within three months to introduce copyright protections. Sir Chris said the amendment would 'bind the hands' of a future parliament and could 'delay' action to protect creatives, 'rather than speed things up'. But Dame Caroline Dinenage, the chairman of the culture, media and sport committee, accused him of 'dancing on the head of the pin' and making excuses for not protecting the arts. It is highly unusual for the House of Lords to vote for an amendment to be sent to the Commons for a third time, when it has already been rejected by the Government twice. The parliamentary row over AI is one of the strongest rebellions from peers in recent years, but ministers have been reluctant to introduce stricter rules that might stop the development of AI in Britain. Sir Nick Clegg, the former president of global affairs at Meta, has said Baroness Kidron's plan would 'kill the AI industry in this country'. But artists and creatives have accused the Government of letting AI companies get away with 'theft' of their content by training models to reproduce it for free. They have argued AI is an 'existential' issue for the creative arts and media, and called on ministers to do more. Reacting to the latest block by ministers, Anna Ganley, chief executive of the Society of Authors, said: 'That the Government has been forced to reject the Kidron amendment for a third time underlines the strength of feeling around this issue across all political parties. 'It also confirms that this Government is apparently happy for writers, illustrators, translators, and other creators to have their work unlawfully exploited by AI companies, without permission or payment.'
The Independent
22-05-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Proposals to protect creatives' copyright from AI are rejected by MPs
Proposals to protect the creative industries against artificial intelligence (AI) have been rejected by MPs, after Parliament heard both sectors need to succeed to grow Britain's economy. Technology Secretary Peter Kyle pledged to set up a series of expert working groups to find a 'workable way forward' for both industries, as he urged MPs to reject the Lords' amendment. Peers attempted to amend the Data (Use and Access) Bill by adding a commitment to introduce transparency requirements, aiming to ensure copyright holders are able to see when their work has been used and by who. MPs voted 195 to 124, majority 71 to disagree with Baroness Beeban Kidron's transparency amendment, in a bid to end the so-called ping-pong. Speaking in the Commons, Mr Kyle said: 'Pitting one against the other is unnecessarily divisive and damages both.' 'The truth is that growing Britain's economy needs both sectors to succeed and to prosper. Britain has to be the place where the creative industries, and every bit as much as AI companies, can invest, grow, are confident in their future prosperity, that is assured. 'We have to become a country where our people can enjoy the benefits and the opportunities of both.' He added: 'It is time to tone down the unnecessary rhetoric and, instead, recognise that the country needs to strike a balance between content and creativity, transparency and training, and recognition and reward. 'That can't be done by well-meaning, but ultimately imperfect, amendments to a Bill that was never intended to do such a thing. 'The issue of AI copyright needs properly considered and enforceable legislation, drafted with the inclusion, the involvement, and the experience of both creatives and technologists. 'To that end, I can tell the House that I am now setting up a series of expert working groups to bring together people from both sectors, on transparency, on licensing and other technical standards to chart a workable way forward.' Intervening, Labour MP James Naish said many of his constituents in Rushcliffe feel 'AI development has already trampled over their rights', adding: 'This is a time-limited issue and action is required.' Mr Kyle said it is 'the truth that so much content has already been used and subsumed by AI models, usually from other territories and also under the current law'. Chairwoman of the culture, media and sport committee, Dame Caroline Dinenage, said: 'What rights holders need is what this amendment says: clear, relevant, accurate and accessible information about the use of their copyright works and the means by which they're assessed. 'That's exactly what it says here, a legislative vehicle in the future, however welcome, is going to be simply too late to protect the livelihoods of so many of the UK's 2.5 million creative workers.' The Conservative MP for Gosport added: 'Is the Government really committed to proactively enforcing our copyright and, if not through this Bill and now, how and when?' Mr Kyle replied: 'We need to make sure that we can have a domestic legal system that is fit for the digital age.' He added that he wanted to 'give the certainty in words, but also, most importantly, to give the certainty in legislation … in the most rapid fashion possible, so that creatives and the AI sector can move forward together'. Conservative MP Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) said: 'He talks about delivering certainty, but does he not see that the certainty he is giving is to large, multinational tech companies to get away with scraping original content that is copyrighted. 'But he is going to give them the certainty through this Bill to abuse the rights of creatives.' Mr Kyle replied: 'I am confused by his intervention. The Bill before us does not mention AI, it does not mention copyright, it has nothing to do with any of those items.' SNP MP Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) accused the Government of offering creators 'nothing', adding: 'I've looked at this amendment the Lords presented, it seems a reasonable amendment, what is wrong with it as a way forward?' Mr Kyle said: 'It is my belief, and it is this Government's belief, that there is a better way forward to give the protections that creative sectors and creators need, and that will deliver them the certainties, protections and the ability to see transparency.' 'We need to take these issues in the round, not one part of it,' he added. Mr Kyle continued: 'Much of the creative content on the internet has already been scraped elsewhere in the world. We cannot turn back time nor should we kid ourselves that we can exercise extraterritorial reach that we simply do not have. 'My determination is to get this absolutely right, not just rush it right now to make ourselves feel better but make no real improvements to the status quo. So let me be absolutely clear to the House – I get it and I will get it right.' Shadow technology minister Ben Spencer said he welcomed the 'huge benefits' which the Bill would have on the economy and public services, but added: 'I fear this Bill will go down in the Government's record as the Bill of missed opportunities. 'A missed opportunity to fix our flawed public datasets which present a barrier to tracking and tackling inequalities in areas such as women's health; a missed opportunity to commit to a review of protections for children and their use of social media platforms; and to commit to taking action to increase those protections where the evidence show's there's good reason. 'And a missed opportunity to provide much needed certainty to two of our key growth industries: the creative and AI sectors; over how they can interact to promote their mutual growth and flourishing.'
Daily Mail
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Keir Starmer suffers THIRD defeat in fight with the House of Lords (and Elton John) over AI copyright protections for artists
Sir Keir Starmer 's government last night suffered yet another defeat over copyright protection from artificial intelligence for the creative industries as peers backed by Sir Elton John showed no sign of backing down. For the third time the House of Lords tried to toughen up a law to prevent tech firms using copyrighted work without permission, after efforts by ministers to block them. The row centres on firms using copyrighted material like song lyrics and books to train their AI systems, without paying those who produced the works. Sir Elton at the weekend branded the Labour government 'losers' for blocking efforts to improve protection. Peers supported by 287 votes to 118, majority 169, an amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill, that adds a commitment to introduce transparency requirements, aiming to ensure copyright holders are able to see when their work has been used and by who. Peers backed independent crossbencher Baroness Beeban Kidron's transparency amendments at report stage of the Bill, which were later voted down by MPs. The unelected house supported her again during the first round of so-called ping-pong and now again in the second round of ping-pong, with the majority increasing each time. Among the 287 to vote in favour of her amendment on Monday were 18 Labour peers, including former Labour deputy leader Tom Watson, now known as Lord Watson of Wyre Forest. The Government has said it will address copyright issues as a whole after the more than 11,500 responses to its consultation on the impact of AI have been reviewed, rather than in what it has branded 'piecemeal' legislation. Lady Kidron, who directed the second film in the Bridget Jones series, rounded on the Government, accusing them of being 'turned by the sweet whisperings of Silicon Valley'. She said: 'The Government have got it wrong. They have been turned by the sweet whisperings of Silicon Valley, who have stolen – and continue to steal every day we take no action – the UK's extraordinary, beautiful and valuable creative output. 'Silicon Valley have persuaded the Government that it is easier for them to redefine theft than make them pay for what they stole. 'If the Government continues on its current intransigent path, we will begin to see the corrosion of our powerful industry, fundamental to country and democracy. It will be a tragedy and it's entirely avoidable.' The online safety campaigner explained that her new amendment accepts that the Government's consultation and report will be the mechanism by which transparency measures will be introduced, and gives the Government free rein on enforcement procedures. However, it does require the Government to ensure clear, relevant and accessible information be provided to copyright holders so they can identify the use of their copyrighted work, and that legislation to be brought forward within six months of the Government's report being published, 18 months from the Bill's passing. Lady Kidron told peers: 'If the Government is not willing to accept a time-limited outcome of its own report, we must ask again if the report is simply a political gesture to push tackling widespread theft of UK copyright into the long grass. 'Because failing to accept a timeline in the real world means starving UK industries of the transparency they need to survive.' She insisted that UK copyright law as it stands is unenforceable, because 'what you can't see you can't enforce', and that without her amendment it will be years before the issue is legislated on, by which time the creative industry will be 'in tatters'. Former BBC children's TV presenter and Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Floella Benjamin backed the amendment, saying it would 'secure our children's future and not sell them down the river', assuring them that 'their creativity will not be stolen'. In a nod to Sir Elton's comments on the issue, former Labour deputy leader and UK Music chairman Lord Watson said: 'It's a little bit funny this feeling inside that I rise to support Baroness Kidron's amendment today, an amendment that my front bench so clearly opposes. 'But my lords, I'm still standing. I'm still standing because I do not yet believe that ministers have heard the clarion cry from our country's creators that they need more from this Bill.' Also backing the amendment was former EastEnders actor and Labour peer Lord Michael Cashman, who recalled character actress Claire Davenport cherishing the royalty cheques she would receive by rubbing them on her 'ample bosom' and saying: 'Now, I can eat'. Responding, technology minister Baroness Jones of Whitchurch insisted that transparency 'cannot be considered in isolation' and that the issue of copyright is 'too important a topic to rush'. She said: 'Alongside transparency, we must also consider licensing, the remuneration of rights holders, and the role of technical solutions and any other number of issues relating to copyright and AI. This is why we consulted on all of these topics. 'We must also keep in mind that any solution adopted by the UK must reflect the global nature of copyright, the creative sector and AI development. We cannot ring-fence the UK away from the rest of the world.' She added: 'This is a policy decision with many moving parts. Jumping the gun on one issue will hamstring us in reaching the best outcome on all the others.' The minister told peers: 'We are all on the same side here. We all want to see a way forward that protects our creative industries while supporting everyone in the UK to develop and benefit from AI. 'This isn't about Silicon Valley, it's about finding a solution for the UK creative and AI tech sectors. We have to find a solution that protects both sectors.' Earlier, peers ended their stand-off on two other amendments, one designed to require public authorities to record sex data based on biological sex, and another to change the definition of scientific research, which critics argued gave AI companies a 'powerful exemption' to reuse data without consent.
The Independent
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Independent
Government suffers third defeat over copyright protection against AI
The Government suffered a resounding defeat in the House of Lords for the third time over copyright protection for creative industries against artificial intelligence (AI). Peers voted 287 to 118, majority 169, to amend the Data (Use and Access) Bill, echoing concerns raised by prominent artists like Sir Elton John and Sir Paul McCartney about AI companies using copyrighted material without consent. The amendment mandates transparency requirements, ensuring copyright holders can identify when and by whom their work is utilised. Peers backed independent crossbencher Baroness Beeban Kidron's transparency amendments at report stage of the Bill, which were later voted down by MPs. The unelected house supported her again during the first round of so-called ping-pong and now again in the second round of ping-pong, with the majority increasing each time. Among the 287 to vote in favour of her amendment on Monday were 18 Labour peers, including former Labour deputy leader Tom Watson, now known as Lord Watson of Wyre Forest. The Government has said it will address copyright issues as a whole after the more than 11,500 responses to its consultation on the impact of AI have been reviewed, rather than in what it has branded 'piecemeal' legislation. Lady Kidron, who directed the second film in the Bridget Jones series, rounded on the Government, accusing them of being 'turned by the sweet whisperings of Silicon Valley'. She said: 'The Government have got it wrong. They have been turned by the sweet whisperings of Silicon Valley, who have stolen – and continue to steal every day we take no action – the UK's extraordinary, beautiful and valuable creative output. 'Silicon Valley have persuaded the Government that it is easier for them to redefine theft than make them pay for what they stole. 'If the Government continues on its current intransigent path, we will begin to see the corrosion of our powerful industry, fundamental to country and democracy. It will be a tragedy and it's entirely avoidable.' The online safety campaigner explained that her new amendment accepts that the Government's consultation and report will be the mechanism by which transparency measures will be introduced, and gives the Government free rein on enforcement procedures. However, it does require the Government to ensure clear, relevant and accessible information is provided to copyright holders so they can identify the use of their copyrighted work, and that legislation is to be brought forward within six months of the Government's report being published, 18 months from the Bill's passing. Lady Kidron told peers: 'If the Government is not willing to accept a time-limited outcome of its own report, we must ask again if the report is simply a political gesture to push tackling widespread theft of UK copyright into the long grass. 'Because failing to accept a timeline in the real world means starving UK industries of the transparency they need to survive.' She insisted that UK copyright law as it stands is unenforceable, because 'what you can't see you can't enforce', and that without her amendment it will be years before the issue is legislated on, by which time the creative industry will be 'in tatters'. Former BBC children's TV presenter and Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Floella Benjamin backed the amendment, saying it would 'secure our children's future and not sell them down the river', assuring them that 'their creativity will not be stolen'. In a nod to Sir Elton's comments on the issue, former Labour deputy leader and UK Music chairman Lord Watson said: 'It's a little bit funny this feeling inside that I rise to support Baroness Kidron's amendment today, an amendment that my front bench so clearly opposes. 'But my lords, I'm still standing. I'm still standing because I do not yet believe that ministers have heard the clarion cry from our country's creators that they need more from this Bill.' Also backing the amendment was former EastEnders actor and Labour peer Lord Michael Cashman, who recalled character actress Claire Davenport cherishing the royalty cheques she would receive by rubbing them on her 'ample bosom' and saying: 'Now, I can eat'. Responding, technology minister Baroness Jones of Whitchurch insisted that transparency 'cannot be considered in isolation' and that the issue of copyright is 'too important a topic to rush'. She said: 'Alongside transparency, we must also consider licensing, the remuneration of rights holders, and the role of technical solutions and any other number of issues relating to copyright and AI. This is why we consulted on all of these topics. 'We must also keep in mind that any solution adopted by the UK must reflect the global nature of copyright, the creative sector and AI development. We cannot ring-fence the UK away from the rest of the world.' 'This is a policy decision with many moving parts. Jumping the gun on one issue will hamstring us in reaching the best outcome on all the others.' The minister told peers: 'We are all on the same side here. We all want to see a way forward that protects our creative industries while supporting everyone in the UK to develop and benefit from AI. 'This isn't about Silicon Valley, it's about finding a solution for the UK creative and AI tech sectors. We have to find a solution that protects both sectors.' Earlier, peers ended their stand-off on two other amendments, one designed to require public authorities to record sex data based on biological sex, and another to change the definition of scientific research, which critics argued gave AI companies a 'powerful exemption' to reuse data without consent.
BBC News
19-05-2025
- Entertainment
- BBC News
Peers demand more protection from AI for creatives
The House of Lords has dealt a second defeat to the government over its Data (Use and Access) had already backed an amendment calling for more copyright protections for the creative industries from artificial intelligence (AI) scrapers rejected that amendment and sent the Bill back to the Lords, where Technology Minister Baroness Jones told peers it would lead to "piecemeal" legislation as it pre-empted consultation on AI and there was broad and vociferous support for Baroness Kidron, a film director and digital rights campaigner, who accused ministers of being swayed by the "whisperings of Silicon Valley" asking them to "redefine theft". The Lords rebellion follows condemnation from Sir Elton John, who called the government "losers" over the weekend and said ministers would be "committing theft" if they allowed AI firms to use artists' content without joins the ranks of high-profile musicians, including Paul McCartney, Annie Lennox, and Kate Bush, who are outraged by plans they say would make it easier for AI models to be trained on copyrighted amendment would force AI companies to disclose what material they were using to develop their programmes, and demand they get permission from copyright holders before they use any of their the power differential between the big tech giants in the US and creatives in the UK, Kidron branded the government's plans "extraordinary"."There's no industrial sector in the UK that government policy requires to give its property or labour to another sector - which is in direct competition with it - on a compulsory basis, in the name of balance," she said."The government has got it wrong."They have been turned by the sweet whisperings of Silicon Valley who have stolen - and continue to steal every day we take no action - the UK's extraordinary, beautiful and valuable creative output."Silicon Valley has persuaded the government that it's easier for them to redefine theft than make them pay for what they have stolen."Defending her amendment, the crossbench peer said it was "the minimum viable action from the government" to signal that "UK copyright law is indeed the law of the land".Otherwise, Kidron said, the Bill was merely a "political gesture" ignoring "widespread theft" of UK copyright and "starving" the creative industry of "the transparency they need to survive". She was backed by Labour's Lord Brennan, who said the government was trying to set up "a double standard" with AI companies, and abandoning its historical leadership over the importance of intellectual copyright."This country has shown leadership throughout history in relation to copyright and setting the highest standards in order to try and drag people up to our level rather than simply putting up the flag of surrender," he said."I fear there is a view that we have to allow AI companies to do anything they want because otherwise they'll just go and do it somewhere else."Lord Watson, former deputy leader of the Labour Party and clearly a fan of Sir Elton, reeled off a string of song lyrics urging ministers to heed "the clarion cry of this country's creators".A third Labour peer, Lord Knight, also called on his party colleagues to "protect the livelihoods of artists from big tech" and said he believed this could be done at the same time as "taking advantage of the creative and economic opportunities of AI". The strength of feeling around the urgency to protect artists was made clear by others, including crossbencher and composer Lord Berkeley, who labelled the current situation "burglary"."The only way you will stop it is by acting now before the gate is trampled down by the horses," he said. "If this door is left open we will destroy the future of our creative industries."Conservative Lord Dobbs agreed those who had "slogged away, struggled and suffered" for their art deserved the government's protection and Liberal Democrat Floella Benjamin said she saluted Kidron for her "tenacity and dogged determination" to ensure "creativity will not be stolen".Baroness Jones spoke again at the close of the debate to plead with peers not to overturn the will of MPs for a second time, insisting "this isn't about Silicon Valley", denying the government was being complacent, and pointing out that "no other territory has cracked this either"."We all want to see a way forward that protects our creative industries while supporting everyone in the UK to develop and benefit from AI," she said."Kidron's amendment will not provide certainty of anything except for certainty of more uncertainty, of continuous regulations stacked one upon another in a pile of instruments..."Jumping the gun on one issue will hamstring us in reaching the best outcome on all the others and especially because this is a global issue and we cannot ringfence the UK away from the rest of the world."However, Kidron said her amendment "does not challenge the primacy of the Commons" and pushed result was a decisive defeat for the Government, with 287 votes in favour of Kidron's amendment and 118 against - a majority of 169 - and the Bill will now be sent back to the Commons. Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
