<\/p>\n
\n\tThe U.K. government\u2019s plans to allow artificial intelligence<\/a> firms to use copyrighted work, including music, have been dealt another setback by the House of Lords.<\/p>\n \n\tAn amendment to the data bill which required AI companies to disclose the copyrighted works their models are trained on was backed by peers in the upper chamber of U.K. Parliament, despite government opposition.<\/p>\n \n\tThe U.K.\u2019s government has proposed an \u201copt out\u201d<\/a> approach for copyrighted material, meaning that the creator or owner must explicitly choose for their work not to be eligible for training AI models. The amendment was tabled by crossbench peer Beeban Kidron<\/strong> and was passed by 272 votes to 125 on Monday (May 12).<\/p>\n \n\tThe data bill will now return to the House of Commons, though the government could remove Kidron\u2019s amendment and send the bill back to the House of Lords next week.<\/p>\n \n\tKidron said: \u201cI want to reject the notion that those of us who are against government plans are against technology. Creators do not deny the creative and economic value of AI, but we do deny the assertion that we should have to build AI for free with our work, and then rent it back from those who stole it.<\/p>\n \n\t\u201cMy lords, it is an assault on the British economy and it is happening at scale to a sector worth \u00a3120bn ($158bn) to the UK, an industry that is central to the industrial strategy and of enormous cultural import.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\tThe \u201copt out\u201d move has proved unpopular with many in the creative fields, particularly in the music space. Prior to the vote, over 400 British musicians including Elton John<\/a>, Paul McCartney<\/a>, Dua Lipa<\/a>, Coldplay<\/a>, Kate Bush<\/a> and more signed an open letter<\/a> calling on U.K. prime minister Sir Keir Starmer to update copyright laws to protect their work from AI companies.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tThe letter said that such an approach would threaten \u201cthe UK\u2019s position as a creative powerhouse,\u201d and signatories included major players such as Sir Lucian Grainge<\/strong> (Universal Music Group CEO), Jason Iley MBE<\/strong> (Sony Music UK CEO), Tony Harlow<\/strong> (Warner Music UK CEO) and Dickon Stainer<\/strong> (Universal Music UK CEO).<\/p>\n \n\tA spokesperson for the government responded to the letter, saying: \u201cWe want our creative industries and AI companies to flourish, which is why we\u2019re consulting on a package of measures that we hope will work for both sectors.\u201d <\/p>\n \n\tThey added: \u201cWe\u2019re clear that no changes will be considered unless we are completely satisfied they work for creators.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\tSophie Jones<\/strong>, chief strategist office for the BPI, said: \u201cThe House of Lords has once again taken the right decision by voting to establish vital transparency obligations for AI companies. Transparency is crucial in ensuring that the creative industries can retain control over how their works are used, enabling both the licensing and enforcement of rights.\u00a0If the Government chooses to remove this clause in the House of Commons, it would be preventing progress on a fundamental cornerstone which can help build trust and greater collaboration between the creative and tech sectors, and it would be at odds with its own ambition to build a licensing market in the UK.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n