Westminster, 20 May 2025 — The Government has faced a resounding defeat for the third time in the House of Lords over the issue of copyright protections for the creative industries in the face of artificial intelligence (AI) advancements.
Peers voted 287 to 118—a majority of 169—in favour of an amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill aimed at increasing transparency regarding how AI firms use copyrighted content. The result marks a significant blow to ministers, as the unelected chamber continues to challenge the Government’s position on copyright and AI.
The amendment, championed by independent crossbencher Baroness Beeban Kidron, mandates the Government to introduce measures ensuring copyright holders are notified when their work is used, by whom, and for what purpose. Despite the Commons previously rejecting the same amendment, the Lords have now supported it for a third time, with an increasing majority on each occasion.
The vote comes amid growing support from prominent figures in the arts, including Sir Elton John and Sir Paul McCartney, who have both warned against AI companies profiting from the use of copyrighted material without consent or compensation.
Lady Kidron, herself a film director known for Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason, condemned the Government’s stance, accusing ministers of being seduced by the promises of Silicon Valley. “They have been turned by the sweet whisperings of Silicon Valley, who have stolen – and continue to steal – the UK’s extraordinary, beautiful and valuable creative output,” she told peers.
Her amendment accepts that the Government’s long-awaited response to its AI and copyright consultation will be the vehicle for implementing transparency measures. However, it insists that legislation must follow within six months of the Government publishing its findings—a timeline that Lady Kidron argues is essential to avoid irreparable harm to the UK’s creative sector.
“If the Government is not willing to accept a time-limited outcome of its own report, we must ask again if the report is simply a political gesture to push tackling widespread theft of UK copyright into the long grass,” she said. “Failing to accept a timeline in the real world means starving UK industries of the transparency they need to survive.”
Her call was echoed by Baroness Floella Benjamin, who argued the amendment was about safeguarding the creative future of British children and preventing their intellectual labour from being “sold down the river.”
In a particularly poignant contribution, Lord Watson of Wyre Forest—former Labour deputy leader and chair of UK Music—broke ranks with his party to support the amendment. Quoting the lyrics of Sir Elton, he declared: “It’s a little bit funny, this feeling inside… but my lords, I’m still standing.” He urged fellow peers to heed the “clarion cry” from the creative community.
Another impassioned speech came from Lord Cashman, former EastEnders actor and long-time advocate for artists’ rights. Recalling actress Claire Davenport’s humorous but heartfelt gratitude for royalty cheques, he underscored how vital copyright income is for working performers.
However, the Government remains reluctant to legislate in what it describes as a “piecemeal” fashion. Technology minister Baroness Jones of Whitchurch warned against rushing into complex legislation without full consideration. “Alongside transparency, we must also consider licensing, the remuneration of rights holders, and the role of technical solutions,” she said.
More Read
She added that the global nature of AI development and intellectual property law made it vital for the UK to take a holistic and international approach. “This is a policy decision with many moving parts. Jumping the gun on one issue will hamstring us in reaching the best outcome on all the others.”
Nonetheless, critics argue that delay equals inaction. Lady Kidron warned that without swift transparency measures, enforcement is impossible: “What you can’t see, you can’t enforce,” she said, warning that by the time comprehensive legislation arrives, “the creative industry will be in tatters.”
Earlier, peers did reach agreement on two other contentious amendments, including one concerning biological sex data in public records and another on redefining scientific research. However, on the matter of AI and copyright, the Lords remain firm in their demand for urgent action to defend Britain’s creative industries.
