The United Kingdom’s government has launched a consultation with the artificial intelligence and creative industries on possible legal frameworks for AI models to train on copyrighted material.

In the Dec. 17 proposals, the UK government has floated a range of possible policies for both the AI and creative industries to provide feedback on up until Feb. 25, 2025. 

Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology Peter Kyle said in a statement that uncertainty about how copyright law applies to AI is holding back both sectors from reaching their full potential.

“It’s clear that our current AI and copyright framework does not support either our creative industries or our AI sectors to compete on the global stage,” he said.

The UK’s consultation comes as many AI companies face backlash over accusations that they’ve stolen intellectual property to help train their AI models.

One of the four policy options floated by the UK was to let AI companies use copyrighted material without the right holders’ permission and permit commercial use for any purpose subject to few or no restrictions.

Another option allows companies to freely use copyrighted material to train AI models unless creative professionals and companies opt out. 

Related: Meta to resume AI training in UK after regulatory pause

Another involves strengthening copyright laws, requiring licensing in all cases so that companies can only train AI models with work for which they have a license and expressed permission.

The consultation also asks if the government should keep the laws as they are, but the agencies behind the consultation acknowledge that this would result in “the current lack of clarity” for copyright holders and AI developers.

Creatives slam proposals

Ed Newton-Rex, a British composer and CEO of Fairly Trained, a nonprofit that certifies AI companies who get a license for their training data, said he thinks the changes to copyright laws would only benefit AI companies and “cause huge, irreversible harm to creators.” 

Newton-Rex also argued some of the changes are misleading because a  copyright exception would make “it legal to train on copyrighted work without a license, where it’s currently illegal.” 

Meanwhile, Owen Meredith, the chief executive of the News Media Association, said in a Dec. 17 statement that the government’s consultation fails to address the real issue, which is a need for robust enforcement and transparency requirements to protect the rights of creatives.

“At present, there is no lack of clarity in the law, but these proposals will only muddy the water and allow GAI firms to shirk their responsibilities,” he said.

“Instead of proposing unworkable systems such as the ‘rights reservations’ or opt-out’ regime, the government should focus on implementing transparency requirements within the existing copyright framework,” Meredith added. 

Magazine: 13 Christmas gifts that Bitcoin and crypto degens will love