United Kingdom - AI Copyright Framework (2025)

Overview

The "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act" represents a pivotal update from the UK government regarding its ongoing efforts to establish a balanced and effective regulatory framework for artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright. Published on 15 December 2025, this statement is mandated by Section 137 of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025. It serves to inform Parliament and the public about the progress made in preparing a comprehensive economic impact assessment and a detailed report on the use of copyright works in AI system development, as required by Sections 135 and 136 of the same Act. The document outlines the government's work following an extensive consultation on Copyright and AI, which ran from 17 December 2024 to 25 February 2025. This consultation aimed to gather diverse perspectives on how UK copyright law should adapt to the rapid advancements in AI technology, particularly concerning the training of AI models and the generation of AI outputs. The core objective is to foster innovation within the burgeoning AI sector while simultaneously safeguarding the rights and ensuring fair remuneration for creators and rights holders within the creative industries.

The statement acknowledges the complex interplay between promoting AI development and protecting intellectual property rights, a challenge that has generated significant debate among stakeholders. It details the government's commitment to designing a framework that enhances rights holders' control over their content, supports wide and lawful access to high-quality material for AI development, and promotes greater trust and transparency between the creative and AI sectors. The consultation received over 11,500 responses, indicating the high level of public and industry interest in this area. A key finding from the consultation, highlighted in the statement, was the overwhelming support (95%) among respondents for strengthening or maintaining existing UK copyright law to require licensing for AI training data, with 88% specifically advocating for requiring licenses in all cases. This contrasted sharply with the government's previously preferred option of a text and data mining (TDM) exception with an opt-out mechanism, which garnered only 3% support. The statement thus sets the stage for future policy decisions that will significantly shape the landscape for AI and intellectual property in the UK.

Definitions

Within the context of the "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act," several key terms are implicitly or explicitly defined through their application in the underlying consultation and the broader UK AI policy landscape. Artificial Intelligence (AI) refers to technologies enabling computers and machines to perform tasks that typically require human intelligence, such as learning, reasoning, and problem-solving. This encompasses various forms, including generative AI models capable of creating new content. Copyright, as per the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA), grants exclusive rights to creators over their original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, including the right to reproduce, adapt, and distribute. The application of these rights to AI-generated content and AI training data is a central focus of the statement.

Text and Data Mining (TDM) is a crucial concept, referring to the automated analytical techniques used to analyze text and data in digital form to generate information which includes patterns, trends, and correlations. For AI development, TDM involves using vast datasets, often containing copyrighted material, to train AI models. The statement addresses the debate around a potential copyright exception for TDM, particularly for commercial purposes, and the mechanisms for rights holders to 'opt-out' of such use. Computer-Generated Works (CGWs) are works created by a computer in circumstances where there is no human author. The statement, reflecting the consultation, examines the continued relevance and scope of copyright protection for such works in the UK, especially given the rapid advancements in generative AI. Lastly, Transparency Duties refer to proposed obligations for AI developers to disclose information about the copyrighted materials used in their training datasets, how these materials were acquired, and potentially to label AI-generated outputs. These definitions are fundamental to understanding the policy considerations and proposed reforms outlined in the government's progress statement.

Governance and Institutional Framework

The governance and institutional framework for AI and copyright in the United Kingdom involves several key government departments and agencies, working collaboratively to navigate this complex policy area. The "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act" highlights the joint efforts of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). These bodies were jointly responsible for the December 2024 consultation on Copyright and AI, and continue to lead the work in preparing the subsequent economic impact assessment and detailed report mandated by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025. The DSIT, as the lead department for science, innovation, and technology, plays a crucial role in fostering AI development and ensuring the UK remains a global leader in AI.

The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) serves as the executive agency responsible for intellectual property rights in the UK, including copyright, patents, and trademarks. Its expertise is central to developing policies that effectively balance the interests of creators and innovators in the AI era. The IPO established a taskforce of approximately 80 existing intellectual property policy officials and analysts to review the extensive responses received during the consultation, ensuring a thorough and consistent interpretation of stakeholder views. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) represents the interests of the creative industries, emphasizing the protection of human creativity and fair remuneration for rights holders. This multi-departmental approach underscores the government's recognition of the cross-cutting nature of AI and copyright, requiring coordinated policy development to achieve its stated objectives of supporting both AI innovation and the creative economy. The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 provides the legislative mandate for these ongoing assessments and reports, embedding the commitment to informed policy-making in law.

Key Focus Areas

The "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act" addresses several critical areas at the intersection of AI and copyright, reflecting the core themes of the preceding government consultation. A primary focus is the Text and Data Mining (TDM) exception for AI training. The consultation explored various options, including a broad exception allowing commercial TDM with an 'opt-out' mechanism for rights holders (the government's initially preferred option) and a stricter approach requiring explicit licenses in all cases. The statement reveals that an overwhelming majority of consultation respondents (95%) favored strengthening copyright or maintaining the existing licensing requirements, with only 3% supporting the opt-out exception. This strong feedback indicates a significant divergence from the government's initial proposal and will likely influence future policy direction.

Another key area is transparency requirements for AI developers. The government recognizes the need for greater clarity regarding the copyrighted materials used to train AI models. Proposals include requiring AI developers to disclose their use of specific works and datasets, and potentially obligations to maintain records or provide information on request. This aims to build trust with creators and enable rights holders to monitor and enforce their intellectual property rights more effectively. The statement also touches upon copyright for Computer-Generated Works (CGWs), examining whether and how copyright protection should apply to content created solely by AI, an area where UK law has historically had unique provisions. Finally, the role of licensing regimes is a significant focus, with discussions on how to facilitate effective licensing mechanisms that ensure fair remuneration for creators while providing AI developers with lawful access to high-quality training data. The ongoing economic impact assessment and the report on the use of copyright works are expected to provide further detailed analysis and proposals on these critical areas.

Implementation Framework

The implementation framework for the UK's AI and copyright policy, as indicated by the "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act," is characterized by an ongoing process of assessment, stakeholder engagement, and potential legislative or regulatory adjustments. The statement itself is a mandated interim report under the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, signaling a structured approach to policy development. The immediate next steps involve the completion and publication, before 18 March 2026, of a comprehensive economic impact assessment and a detailed report on the use of copyright works in AI systems. These documents will synthesize the extensive feedback from the public consultation and provide the analytical foundation for future policy decisions.

The government's approach emphasizes a collaborative model, involving dedicated working groups focused on specific aspects such as technical measures and standards, the effect of copyright on data access, information and transparency, and licensing. These groups, comprising experts from various sectors, met in late 2025 to explore practical solutions and gather further insights. This iterative process allows for continuous refinement of policy proposals in light of evolving technological capabilities and stakeholder concerns. While the statement does not announce immediate legislative changes, it lays the groundwork for potential reforms, which could include amendments to existing copyright law (e.g., the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988), the introduction of new statutory codes of practice, or the issuance of official guidance. The overarching goal is to establish a clear, predictable, and innovation-friendly legal environment that simultaneously respects and protects the rights of creators within the digital economy.

Monitoring and Evaluation

The "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act" outlines a robust approach to monitoring and evaluation, primarily through the mandated economic impact assessment and the report on the use of copyright works. These documents, due by 18 March 2026, are central to the government's strategy for evaluating the effectiveness and consequences of its evolving AI and copyright policies. The economic impact assessment, required by Section 135 of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, will meticulously analyze the financial implications of various policy options proposed in the initial consultation. This includes assessing the impact on a wide range of stakeholders, from individual copyright owners and micro, small, and medium-sized businesses in the creative industries to large AI developers. The aim is to understand the potential benefits and costs associated with different regulatory approaches, ensuring that future policies are evidence-based and promote sustainable growth across both sectors.

Complementing the economic assessment, the report on the use of copyright works, mandated by Section 136 of the Act, will delve into specific issues such as technical measures for controlling content use, the impact of copyright on text and data mining, transparency duties for AI developers, and the efficacy of licensing frameworks. This report will also consider AI systems developed both within and outside the UK, acknowledging the international dimension of AI development and copyright enforcement. The statement highlights that the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has established a taskforce to review the extensive consultation responses, ensuring a systematic and consistent interpretation of views. Furthermore, dedicated working groups are actively exploring these areas, contributing to a continuous feedback loop that will inform the final recommendations. This comprehensive monitoring and evaluation framework is designed to ensure that the UK's AI and copyright policies remain agile, responsive to technological advancements, and capable of achieving the dual objectives of fostering innovation and protecting creative rights.

Penalties, Liability, and Appeals

While the "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act" itself is a progress report and does not directly introduce new penalties or liability regimes, it lays the groundwork for future policy developments that will address these critical aspects. The underlying consultation on Copyright and AI, which the statement reports on, explicitly considered issues of infringement and liability relating to AI-generated content and the use of copyrighted material in AI training. Under current UK law, unauthorized copying of third-party content for commercial AI training is highly likely to infringe copyright, and any output reproducing a 'substantial part' of a protected work would also constitute infringement.

The government's stated objectives, reiterated in the progress statement, include enhancing rights holders' control and their ability to be remunerated for the use of their content. This implies a commitment to ensuring that effective enforcement mechanisms exist for copyright infringement in the AI context. The consultation explored options for transparency duties, which could include requirements for AI developers to disclose training data, thereby facilitating rights holders' ability to identify potential infringements and seek redress. Furthermore, the discussion around a 'rights reservation mechanism' (opt-out) for text and data mining suggests that if an AI developer fails to respect an author's decision to opt out, the rights holder would be entitled to enforce their copyright. The ongoing economic impact assessment and the report on the use of copyright works are expected to provide specific proposals on how liability will be apportioned, what forms of redress will be available, and whether new enforcement powers or regulatory oversight will be necessary to ensure compliance with future AI and copyright frameworks. The broader Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, which mandates this statement, provides a legislative foundation for addressing these legal uncertainties.

Relationship to Other Instruments

The "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act" is intricately linked to several other key legal and policy instruments within the United Kingdom's regulatory landscape. Fundamentally, it is an interim report mandated by Sections 135, 136, and 137 of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025. This Act provides the overarching legislative framework that requires the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology to conduct and publish an economic impact assessment and a detailed report on the use of copyright works in AI systems. The statement therefore directly operationalizes a component of this broader data-focused legislation, demonstrating the government's commitment to a legally grounded and evidence-based approach to AI regulation.

Furthermore, the statement's content is deeply rooted in the existing Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA), which forms the bedrock of UK copyright law. The consultation preceding this statement specifically sought views on how the CDPA should be adapted or clarified in light of AI advancements, particularly concerning text and data mining exceptions and the treatment of computer-generated works. The government's proposals aim to address the legal uncertainties arising from AI's interaction with the CDPA. The statement also relates to the UK's broader AI Opportunities Action Plan, published in January 2025, which outlines a strategic initiative to leverage AI for economic growth and public service enhancement. While the Action Plan covers a wider array of AI-related recommendations, the copyright aspect is a crucial enabler for responsible AI development, as acknowledged within the progress statement. The ongoing policy development also considers the implications of international agreements, such as the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, ensuring that any domestic reforms remain compliant with international obligations.

International Alignment

The "Copyright and artificial intelligence statement of progress under Section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act" implicitly and explicitly acknowledges the importance of international alignment in developing the UK's AI and copyright framework. The global nature of AI development and the cross-border flow of data and creative works necessitate a consideration of international standards and approaches. The underlying consultation on Copyright and AI, which the statement reports on, directly referenced and compared UK proposals with those adopted in other major jurisdictions, particularly the European Union. For instance, the consultation's preferred option of a text and data mining (TDM) exception with a rights reservation (opt-out) mechanism was noted to mirror the approach taken in the EU under Article 4 of the Digital Single Market Copyright Directive.

The statement indicates that the forthcoming report on the use of copyright works in AI systems will consider AI systems developed both within and outside the UK, highlighting the government's awareness of the need for a framework that can address international complexities and prevent regulatory arbitrage. The UK, as a signatory to international treaties such as the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, is committed to ensuring that any changes to its copyright laws remain compliant with these international obligations, including the protection of authors' rights. The ongoing dialogue and assessments aim to position the UK as a leader in responsible AI innovation, potentially influencing or aligning with emerging international norms for AI governance and intellectual property. This international perspective is crucial for fostering cross-border collaboration, ensuring market access for UK AI companies, and protecting UK creators in a global digital economy.

Implementation Timeline

Sources and References