UK government signals it will not force tech firms to disclose how they train AI
Ministers are holding firm in a standoff with the House of Lords, which has called for artists to be offered immediate copyright protection against artificial intelligence companies.
Peers voted by 221 to 116 on Wednesday to insist on an amendment to the data bill that would force AI firms to be transparent about what copyrighted material they use to train their models.
In an amendment tabled on Friday, the government dismissed the Lords' request and reiterated its promise to publish an economic impact assessment and technical reports on the future of AI and copyright regulation.
Beeban Kidron, the cross-bench peer and film director who has campaigned on behalf of the industry, said during Wednesday's debate that she would 'accept anything that the Commons does' after this week. 'I will not stand in front of your Lordships again and press our case,' she said.
But the News Media Association (NMA), which represents publishers including the Guardian, said peers could table further amendments to the data bill when it returns to the Lords next Wednesday.
Industry figures said the government was acting in bad faith by not addressing the Lords' concerns and called for it to make further amendments of its own before MPs vote on it on Tuesday.
Kidron said: 'The government has repeatedly taken all protections for UK copyrights holders out of the data bill. In doing so they have shafted the creative industries, and they have proved willing to decimate the UK's second biggest industrial sector. They have lied to parliament, and they are lying to the sector.'
She said the government's action 'adds another sector to the growing number that have an unbridgeable gap of trust with the government'.
Owen Meredith, chief executive of the NMA, said: 'the government's refusal to listen to the strong view of the Lords … risks undermining the legislative process.
'There is still time for the government to do the right thing, and take transparency powers in this bill. This would be a key step towards rebuilding trust with a £126bn industry.'
Sign up to Headlines UK
Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning
after newsletter promotion
The government's approach to copyright has drawn the ire of major creative artists and organisations including Paul McCartney, Kate Bush and the National Theatre, with Elton John describing the situation as an 'existential issue' this week.
Opponents of the plans have warned that even if the attempts to insert clauses into the data bill fail, the government could be challenged in the courts over the proposed changes.
The consultation on copyright changes, which is due to produce its findings before the end of the year, contains four options: to let AI companies use copyrighted work without permission, alongside an option for artists to 'opt out' of the process; to leave the situation unchanged; to require AI companies to seek licences for using copyrighted work; and to allow AI firms to use copyrighted work with no opt-out for creative companies and individuals.
Kyle has said the copyright-waiver-plus-opt-out scenario is no longer the government's preferred option, but Kidron's amendments have attempted to head off that option by effectively requiring tech companies to seek licensing deals for any content that they use to train their AI models.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
British spy planes are helping Israel find hostages in Gaza
British military aircraft are flying over Gaza to help Israel find missing hostages, even as the UK condemns Israel's actions in the war-torn enclave. Intelligence gathered by RAF planes flying over Gaza is 'routinely' shared with the Israelis, who use the information to track captured hostages, the Ministry of Defence told The Telegraph. Hundreds of missions have been flown by Shadow R1 surveillance aircraft over Gaza since the war broke out in October 2023, including last month. It comes as Benjamin Netanyahu considers plans to fully occupy the Palestinian territory. 'The die has been cast. We're going for the full conquest of the Gaza Strip – and defeating Hamas,' a senior Israeli official was quoted by the Hebrew media as saying. Around 20 of the remaining 50 hostages in Gaza are thought to still be alive. The families of the hostages fear plans to take over the Strip could endanger their loved ones. Israel's allies are also thought to be opposed to Mr Netanyahu's plans, and pressure is growing on the Jewish state to wind down its military campaign and alleviate the ongoing humanitarian crisis. The continuation of British military support above Gaza comes as Israel-UK relations plummet to an all-time low. The Government has sanctioned a number of hard-Right Israeli ministers and threatened to recognise a Palestinian state at the UN in September unless conditions in the enclave improve. David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, said he was 'sickened' by reports of Israeli troops firing at Palestinians at aid distribution centres. Britain has supported Israel's military operations in Gaza by flying above the enclave to help find hostages since October 2023, when Hamas killed 1,200 Israelis in a terror attack. RAF aircraft have flown nearly daily missions, gathering intelligence the MoD says is used solely to locate hostages. The RAF's Shadow R1 plane is equipped with electronic sensors that are able to gather data on the ground in Gaza. It is used to identify vehicle convoys, residential buildings and zoom in on individual movement in the Gaza Strip. An RAF source told The Times that the Shadow R1 aircraft had returned to Britain. It is unclear which planes have taken over intelligence gathering. A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: 'Since early December 2023, the RAF has routinely conducted unarmed surveillance flights over Gaza for the sole purpose of locating hostages. 'The UK controls what information is passed to Israeli authorities and only information relating to hostage rescue will be passed to the relevant authority. 'We do not comment on operational detail for security reasons.'
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Police face weeks-long delay before they can reveal suspects' nationalities
Police face a weeks-long delay before they are allowed to reveal suspects' nationalities because Downing Street is waiting for new independent guidance before changing the rules. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, is urging forces to give more information about suspects' nationalities and migration status after Reform accused Warwickshire Police of a 'cover-up' over the rape of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton. However, an official rule change on when foreigners can be publicly identified as suspects has been delayed because of a review that is not expected to be published until the autumn. It came amid criticism of the Government's broader strategy on illegal migration, after Ms Cooper was unable to say whether a new deal with the French would allow small boat migrants to be deported this month. Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, warned that the deal was 'wide open to abuse' because France does not have to share any data on who is coming to Britain – meaning new arrivals could include criminals and terrorists. Ministers have asked the Law Commission, an independent advisory body, to update guidance on contempt of court rules, which currently prevent police or officials from giving details about suspects. The review, commissioned in February, is not expected to report until the autumn, and a change in guidance for police forces could be implemented weeks after that. Without an urgent change, ministers fear a repeat of the riots that followed the Southport stabbings last summer, while Downing Street has said police should be more 'transparent' about their suspects. There is concern among law enforcement officials and in Whitehall that public debate about crime by migrants and the threat of violent protests at asylum hotels will culminate into a summer of 'disorder' on the streets. Ms Cooper told the BBC on Tuesday: 'We do want to see more transparency in cases, we think local people do need to have more information.' One police leader told The Telegraph that while the previous system of 'saying as little as possible in order to preserve a fair trial' had worked well in the past, the rise of social media had 'driven a coach and horses' through that approach. He said the absence of information all too often created a vacuum, which was filled by mis- or disinformation, and said the risk to public order meant police must provide more information. The review of police protocol follows inaccurate speculation on social media of the Southport attacker's identity last year, with users alleging that Axel Rudakubana was an illegal immigrant. George Finch, the 19-year-old Reform leader of Warwickshire county council, on Monday accused the Government of covering up alleged crime by migrants in Nuneaton, claiming that the two men charged with the rape of a 12-year-old girl were Afghan. That claim has not been confirmed by police. There is not currently any guidance issued to forces about disclosing the ethnicity or immigration status of an individual on charge. The rules state only that a suspect should be named unless there is an exceptional and legitimate policing purpose for not doing so, or if reporting restrictions apply. Philip Seccombe, the Warwickshire Police and Crime Commissioner, has said that any release of information by police should 'follow national guidance and legal requirements'. The review of the guidelines on contempt of court was commissioned by Ms Cooper, Shabana Mahmood, the Justice Secretary, and Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, earlier this year. The Law Commission's review is expected to find that police officials and ministers should be allowed to reveal more information about suspects in cases where there is a 'threat of serious public disorder'. However, despite a request from ministers to publish new guidelines 'as soon as feasible', the body is not expected to report for some weeks. The delay has effectively left police forces defenceless against accusations of a cover-up, while Downing Street is urging them to make more information available. Another senior officer told The Telegraph any change to the rules would create new issues for the police because they do not routinely collect nationality and ethnicity data unless it is relevant to an investigation. 'The police's job is about gathering evidence and I can see some real practical difficulties in requiring forces to provide extra information,' the officer said. A Home Office source said: 'Not only are we deporting foreign criminals at a rate that Chris Philp and Robert Jenrick never managed when they were in charge at the Home Office, but we are also publishing far more information about that group of offenders than the Tories ever did.' Sir Keir is separately facing criticism over the one in, one out migrant deal agreed with Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, under which migrants who come to the UK illegally are meant to be swapped for people in France who have a legitimate asylum claim in Britain. The Prime Minister announced on Monday that the process of deporting the first Channel migrants under the deal will begin within days. But Mr Philp said the details of the agreement, published on Tuesday, show it will be a 'lawyer's paradise' that will make it too easy for migrants to stay. The agreement states that people who have made 'clearly unfounded' claims under the Human Rights Act will not automatically be deported, meaning lawyers will be able to create lengthy delays. The agreement states that anyone claiming to be under the age of 18 will be able to stay in the UK. Mr Philp said that because Britain does not carry out robust age checks, it means that people in their 20s who could they are under 18 could be allowed to stay. In addition, under the deal France will not have to hand over any data on the people they are sending to the UK, meaning they could be criminals or terrorists. 'This deal is unworkable and wide open to abuse,' he said. 'It's exactly what we've been warning about – a bureaucrat's dream and a lawyer's paradise set to prevent people ever being returned to France. 'There are no numbers specified, presumably because they are so small they would embarrass the Home Secretary. France won't even tell us any information about who we have to accept back, so they could be criminals or terrorists, and we wouldn't know. 'This is a pathetic deal, which simply won't work. No wonder this Government has presided over the worst channel crossing figures in history.'
The Sun
28 minutes ago
- The Sun
Of all the harebrained schemes to smash migrant smugglers, Labour's new One In One Out plan is worst of all – here's why
HOME SECRETARY Yvette Cooper has a new plan to stop the migrants flooding into this country but is not going to tell you about it. It isn't about the numbers. They're calling the plan One-in, One-out but that isn't about the numbers, either. 4 4 More than 25,400 illegal migrants have crossed the Channel this year alone — 50 per cent more than last year — but that's not about the numbers, apparently. Ms Cooper isn't inclined to even reveal how many of them will be sent back to France under the new scheme, because to do so would only aid the people smugglers, or so she claims. Yesterday we had the rather ludicrous launch of a new policy that doesn't even do what it says on the tin. The Government's hope that this gimmick — for that is plainly what it is — will convince anyone the vile people-smuggling gangs will simply give up trafficking their lucrative quarries is wildly deluded. Taxpayer's expense Any examination of the new system makes it immediately obvious that there is no chance of it working. The Home Secretary said yesterday that, as of this week, migrants arriving illegally on to our shores will be detained then returned to France. Ms Cooper said detained 'within days' and returned 'within weeks'. But how, exactly? It was what she didn't say that was of far more interest. For example, where will they be detained? As far as we know, there are no workable detention centres anywhere near Dover. Small boat migrant found dead riddled with bullets on French coast after being gunned down 'by people smugglers' And Manston, the current holding area 20 miles away, is already over capacity. Ms Cooper has not volunteered any information as to where the arrivals will go. Neither has she suggested how long they will be held in detention, whether they will go through a court process or, indeed, whether they will be able to access legal services at the taxpayer's expense. As if all that wasn't bad enough, there is simply no explanation at all of how the migrants will be 'returned'. Will they all be packed into the back of a lorry? Will Border Force take them back to France on their boats? Or will it be down to the RNLI? One-in, One-out, it may be called, but not one clue is being given as to its likely success Perhaps the migrants will be put on the Eurostar or flown out of the country on one of those chartered jets. You might as well throw a dice or toss a coin. One-in, One-out, it may be called, but not one clue is being given as to its likely success. The Home Secretary has conceded there 'might' be legal challenges in some cases. So it's then back to the old right to a family life, under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The public, of course, are under no illusions. 4 4 My listeners and readers gave me their verdict about all this yesterday. 'If it's 50,000 in and 50,000 out, they get replaced by another 50,000, so it's still 50,000 more,' said one wise caller. Despite Ms Cooper's claim that this is not about the numbers, the increasingly frustrated and fed-up citizens of this country are very clear that it is. She has conceded that only about 50 migrants will be exchanged per week in the initial pilot stage of the programme — which is due to run for only 11 months. That represents just one in 17 of the current small-boat arrivals on to our shores. And so, obviously, the numbers do matter. Ms Cooper says that the replacement migrants will be fully documented and legitimised. In effect, they will qualify to come and live here because they can prove who they are and that they have family here. Does she really think that system won't be abused? Asylum seekers in France can now apply online to come to Britain. So, you can only imagine the numbers that will flock to the French coast in the hopes of a successful application. In one fell swoop, the Government has taken away the risk of dying in the Channel — instead encouraging the migrants to fill out a form. Harebrained schemes And who will assess the suitability of the applicants? Will a family of four from Libya get precedence over two teenage brothers from Eritrea? And if their application is successful, where will they live? A migrant hotel? Social housing? An army camp? Of all the harebrained schemes to smash the gangs, stop the boats, fix the system and secure our borders — yes, Sir Keir Starmer has promised to do all four — this is perhaps the worst of all. It brings yet more people into the country with no perceived skills or reason to be here. It adds fuel to an already tense situation, up and down the country. And it will almost certainly fail to do what it is meant to do. Aside from that, it'll cost more billions of pounds of our money. I'm not in. I'm out.
