The ongoing debate over the Government’s AI copyright consultation has intensified after a leading tech lobby group, techUK, claimed it was granted extra time to submit its response.
This has sparked a wave of outrage from creatives, who believe the extension is a sign that tech companies are receiving special treatment.
Outrage Over Perceived Favoritism Toward Tech Firms
The Government has firmly denied granting any extensions, stating that the consultation officially closed last week.
However, techUK told the Daily Mail that it was given more time to file its submission.
This revelation has been met with strong reactions from artists and industry leaders, who are already deeply critical of the proposals.
Mike Batt, an English singer-songwriter known for his work with the London Philharmonic Orchestra, expressed concerns that tech companies might be “strategically waiting” to see how others respond before submitting their own feedback.
He fears that such delays could give them an unfair advantage in shaping the final outcome.
Concerns About the Consultation’s Impact on the Creative Industry
Baroness Kidron, the director of Bridget Jones, also weighed in, stating that the situation only deepens the “mistrust” surrounding the consultation process.
She emphasized that there seems to be no fair option for the creative industries, and that the proposals appear to favor tech giants like Silicon Valley over individual artists and creators.
The consultation, launched by the Government last December, proposed allowing tech firms to use creators’ works for AI training without compensation, unless creators choose to “opt out.”
This sparked an outcry from the UK’s £126 billion creative sector, which argued that the proposals would undermine their intellectual property rights and leave them unprotected.
The Fight for Fair Copyright Protection
Artists and industry professionals are alarmed by the suggestion that AI companies should be able to freely access and use works like news articles, books, music, and films for training their AI models without paying creators.
Current copyright laws automatically protect creators and ensure they are compensated when their works are used without permission.
Despite the backlash, Government representatives insist that the consultation closed on February 25, and no individual organizations were granted an extension.
A spokesperson for techUK, however, stated that extensions are “common practice” and maintained that a broader text and data mining exception with an opt-out mechanism would align the UK with other major economies like the EU.
What’s Next for the AI Copyright Debate?
As the consultation draws to a close, creatives are left feeling uncertain about the future of their rights in an increasingly AI-driven world.
Many are continuing to campaign against the proposals, with the Daily Mail leading efforts to push back against what they see as unfair advantages for tech companies.
The growing divide between the Government and the creative industries underscores the ongoing tensions between innovation and intellectual property protection.
Whether this debate will result in a fair compromise for all parties remains to be seen.