The UK government has received thousands of responses to its consultation on the highly contentious issue of how copyrightable material can be used to train AI models.

A flurry of statements and protests yesterday (25 February) – the last day of the consultation period – included the release of a silent album by more than 1,000 musicians, including Kate Bush, Damon Albarn and Annie Lennox.

The consultation was launched in December and GLP understands that the government has received more than 11,000 responses, with a spokesperson welcoming the “significant engagement” that the proposed plans have garnered.

The Law Society CEO Ian Jeffery said the copyright rules should be able to protect and benefit both creators and AI developers and there had to be “a specific and controlled process for using publicly available data and other content by AI, making sure creators retain control of their intellectual property”.

One of the core proposals of the consultation is to permit AI companies to use copyrighted material without permission, although rightsholders would still be able to “reserve their rights” by opting out of this regime and preventing the use of their content to train the models.

Adam Gilbertson, managing associate at IP firm Mathys & Squire, said that the opt-out plan was a “sensible middle ground that should help ensure that content creators can seek fair remuneration for use of their copyright-protected works whilst providing a safe harbour for AI developers, helping to make the UK a welcoming environment for AI R&D without too much red tape”.

He urged the government to standardise the opt-out process thereby helping “to avoid potential disputes over what material is and is not available for commercial use”.

Mathys & Squire also pointed out that the consultation asks for readers’ advice on whether AI material should be flagged as being created by AI – and whether the government should be responsible for regulating that. It is calling on the government to seriously consider this.

Gilbertson said: “As content generated using Gen AI becomes increasingly indistinguishable from genuine manmade material, in many cases it’s in the public interest to know what material has been generated by AI so that they can make a properly informed opinion about that material.”

Training data sources

Another crucial proposal is a requirement for AI model developers to be more transparent about how they obtain and use datasets for training.

The Law Society’s Jeffery stated that for the “sake of transparency, developers should be encouraged to disclose their training data sources. While large AI models should be regulated, similar standards should be made available for smaller innovators on a voluntary basis”.

AI knows no borders, he continued, “so we urge the UK government to collaborate with other countries as the new system should be able to work on an international scale”.

Dan Conway, CEO of the Publishers Association, said it had “several concerns and questions that need addressing”. He called the use by AI companies of copyrightable materials to train their models “the great copyright heist” which could not go unchallenged.

He continued that big tech companies needed to pay for the creative and research content “they hoover up to train AI, just as they pay for their electricity and other normal costs of running a legally compliant business”.

“We urgently need transparency regulations to lift the lid on AI usage to ensure that the huge opportunities that AI can bring are realised in a way that incentivises growth across the whole economy and is safe and ethical for those who use it,” he added.

Silent protest

More than 1,000 musicians joined together to release the silent album in protest against the proposal to let AI companies use copyright-protected work without permission.

The promotional page says the “album consists of recordings of empty studios and performance spaces, representing the impact we expect the government’s proposals would have on musicians’ livelihoods”. All profits from the album are being donated to the charity Help Musicians.

The Guardian reported yesterday (25 February) that the government was considering making concessions to the creative industries, with one option being to allow them to opt in to the proposed system as opposed to having to opt out.

The UK government spokesperson said: “We have always been clear that our objectives are to enhance control for rights holders over how their work is used, to enable lawful access to material to train world-leading models in the UK, and to build greater transparency over material being used. We will continue to engage extensively as we consider next steps, and our proposals will be set out in due course.”

Click here to download the LexisNexis Legal AI Solution Buyer’s Guide and here to visit the GLP Generative AI Legal Research Hub, in association with LexisNexis.