AI, copyright and the creative industries(2026)
- May 12
- 4 min read
Main findings
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems can now produce imitations of creative material in seconds. These capabilities depend on training models on vast quantities of human-created content, often without explicit consent or remuneration. As a result, the protections for creators afforded by copyright are now under threat.
In its report, the Communications and Digital Committee says that this is not because the UK’s copyright framework is outdated or in need of reform. Rather, widespread unlicensed use of protected works, coupled with limited transparency from AI developers about how their models have been trained, leaves rights holders unsure about whether their content has been used, and unable to enforce their rights when it has. In addition, the absence of a robust 'personality right' or specific protection for digital likeness in the UK means creators and performers are unable to challenge harmful outputs that imitate their distinctive style, voice or persona.
The report concludes that the Government should support the UK to become a world-leading home for responsible, licensing-based AI development, rather than weakening copyright law for speculative AI gains and damaging our creative industries in the process.
SUMMARY
The UK faces a choice between two futures. In the first, the UK becomes a world-leading home for responsible, licensing-based artificial intelligence (AI) development, where commercial model developers using UK content obtain permission, pay fair remuneration to rights holders and can deploy their models without questions of legal liability. Domestic AI efforts would be directed towards building sovereign models whose training data and development processes are open to scrutiny. In this scenario, both the UK’s creative industries and AI sector could thrive, building on our national strengths and unique selling point of innovating in creative technology.
In the second scenario, the UK continues to drift towards tacit acceptance of large-scale, unlicensed use of creative content and long-term dependence on opaque models trained overseas, with most benefits accruing to a small number of US-based firms while harms to UK creators grow.
Only the first path is compatible with the UK’s long-term interests. The UK’s creative industries are an economic powerhouse that contributed £124 billion to the UK economy in 2023, with gross value added expected to reach £141 billion by 2030. Their success is underpinned by a “gold-standard” copyright framework, which rewards creativity, supports sustainable business models for creative work, and commands international respect.
In the age of AI, the protections for creators afforded by copyright are under threat. Generative AI systems can now generate imitations of creative material in seconds, but speed is not a substitute for the value of the human creativity, skill and dedication that underpin original work. And these capabilities of AI systems depend on training models on vast quantities of human-created content, much of it copyrighted and drawn directly from the creative sector.
This is not because our copyright framework is outdated or in need of reform. Rather, widespread unlicensed use of protected works, coupled with limited transparency from AI developers about how their models have been trained, leaves rightsholders unsure about whether their content has been used, and unable to enforce their rights when it has. In addition, the absence of a robust ‘personality right’ or specific protection for digital likeness in the UK means creators and performers are unable to challenge harmful outputs that imitate their distinctive style, voice or persona.
These problems pose material risks to the livelihoods of individual rightsholders. Creators are already losing meaningful control over how their works and identities are used, leading to tangible economic harms, while an influx of AI-generated content in the market is replacing human-made work and undercutting paid commissions.
Meanwhile, technology sector stakeholders are pressing for the introduction in the UK of a broad new exception for commercial text and data mining (TDM) that would legitimize large-scale AI training on copyright-protected works. Without this, they argue, the growth of the UK’s AI sector will be stunted.
There is, however, only limited evidence to show that weakening UK copyright law would significantly expand our AI sector. In contrast, a broad commercial TDM exception presents predictable harms to rightsholders by removing incentives to license protected works for AI training.
It would be a poor bet to sacrifice the UK’s outstanding creative capacity for speculative AI gains. A new regime must now be created to safeguard creators’ livelihoods, while harnessing the potential of AI for creativity and economic growth. To deliver this, we recommend the following actions:
Rule out a new commercial text and data mining exception with an opt-out model: The Government was right to “reset” its initial approach to AI and copyright, but mixed public messaging and an extended consultation period have undermined trust and stalled licensing and investment. The Government should, in the next year, publish a final decision on its approach to AI and copyright. In the meantime, it should set out clearly that it will not introduce a new TDM exception with an opt-out mechanism.
Close gaps in protection for identity, style and digital replicas: The Government should introduce protections against unauthorised digital replicas and harmful ‘in the style of’ AI outputs. These must give creators and performers clear control over commercial exploitation of their identity.
Make transparency about AI training data a statutory obligation: The Government should establish a clear, mandatory transparency framework for AI developers. Any regime should be carefully designed to ensure disclosures are sufficiently granular to meet rightsholders’ needs, while avoiding disproportionate burdens, particularly on small UK-based AI firms.
Create the conditions for a fair and inclusive UK licensing market: A market for licensing content for AI use is already emerging. The Government should prioritise enabling a sustainable ecosystem that works for rightsholders and developers of different sizes, rather than relying on a single marketplace initiative such as its Creative Content Exchange pilot. As the market develops, the Government should also explore mechanisms to ensure that remuneration reaches individual creators, including through collaboration with existing collective management organisations (CMOs).
Champion the development of technical standards for control, provenance and labelling: The Government must also back the creation and adoption of the technical tools that will support a licensing-first approach: open, interoperable and globally aligned standards for rights reservation, data provenance and the labelling of AI-generated content. It should be prepared to legislate where necessary to ensure effective implementation.
Prioritize the development and adoption of sovereign AI models: International examples demonstrate that domestically governed AI systems can offer an alternative to an overreliance on opaquely trained US-based models. The Government’s sovereign AI efforts should foster the creation of models that deliver enhanced transparency and respect for copyright.