Manifesto: IP and Copyright

In this series, we reflect on the one-year anniversary of Creative UK’s Manifesto for change. ‘Our Creative Future’ was published just months before the UK General Election that would bring about a new Labour Government. 

So much has happened in that time, but one thing has remained constant: Creative UK has been using its voice to shout loudly about the issues we laid out as priority – and those which matter to our members, our partners, the businesses we work with and invest in, and the sector.  

So what, if anything has moved on in the last year? This week, we’ll be posting about each priority area from our Manifesto in turn, taking a deep dive into what we said, why it matters, and what has happened so far. 

Today, we’re focusing on IP and copyright.

We said:

Enable innovation and provide security for creatives, by protecting Intellectual Property (IP) in the age of Artificial Intelligence (AI).

Key developments: 

The Government has had to confront the tricky balance between AI innovation and copyright head-on. In December 2024 it launched a consultation proposing a new copyright exception to allow text and data mining (TDM) of copyrighted material for AI, coupled with a ‘rights reservation’ system (an opt-out for creators who don’t want their work used).  

Creative UK submitted a formal response to the UK Government’s Intellectual Property Office consultation on copyright and artificial intelligence. The submission made clear that while AI presents real opportunities for creative professionals, any benefits must not come at the expense of creators’ rights. Copyright is the lifeblood of the UK’s cultural and creative industries – and any move that weakens it risks undermining the sector’s long-term sustainability. 

Creative UK opposed the Government’s preferred ‘Option 3’ – introducing a new text and data mining (TDM) exception with an opt-out mechanism for rights holders – on the grounds that it is unworkable and would shift economic value from creators to technology platforms. Our submission set out concerns about the technical and legal flaws of the proposed model, including the absence of enforceable standards, inadequate transparency measures, and the disproportionate burden placed on SMEs, micro-businesses and freelancers.

Polling conducted alongside our response revealed strong support for copyright protection: 73% of respondents preferred Option 1 (licensing requirements), while only 30% backed Option 3 with safeguards. Nearly half (46%) opposed Option 3 outright. We also highlighted that a robust licensing market for AI training does not yet exist, and that the burden should not fall on creators to opt out of uses they never consented to. The submission recommended instead that the Government strengthen licensing mechanisms and mandate transparency from AI developers. Creative UK also called for new protections around digital replicas (‘deepfakes’) and supported clearer labelling to distinguish between AI-generated and human-created content. These safeguards, we argued, are essential to ensuring AI enhances – rather than exploits – the UK’s creative economy.  

The creative sector is watching closely to ensure that any AI policy ‘brings mutual benefits to everyone’ as our manifesto envisioned – meaning creators reap rewards when their content fuels AI, and AI innovation can proceed on a foundation of respect for copyright. Achieving this would solidify the UK’s reputation as a leader in both creative tech and IP rights, whereas a misstep could risk our world-class creative talent base.

What our members think…

British Phonographic Industry (BPI) said: “The new Labour Government has rightly identified the creative industries as a priority for growth. A strong Intellectual Property framework is fundamental to our continued success and to what has allowed British creativity to innovate and flourish to date. While we are excited by the opportunities AI presents, we are concerned by the Government’s proposal to effectively water down the UK’s world leading copyright laws to favour of predominantly foreign-based tech companies. Moving forward, there must be a recognition from the Government that there are no creative industries without robust and enforceable Intellectual Property rights and that their approach is at odds with the ambition for continued growth.” 

DACS said: “A year on from the Creative UK Manifesto, the picture has evolved in many ways. When the Manifesto launched in April 2024, DACS had recently published our report AI & Artists, which showed that an overwhelming majority of artists – 95% – wanted control, credit and remuneration for any training of generative AI models on their work, and 89% wanted the government of the time to do more to protect their rights. Since then, the Labour government’s proposals to introduce a text and data mining exception has sparked vocal concern from artists and rightsholders across repertoires – echoing what we already know: that all creatives value control of their work, and want to be paid for its use.

“Artists are not ‘anti-AI’, but the government’s proposals through the AI consultation were not fit for purpose, as they would not provide control and remuneration for rightsholders, nor instil trust in generative AI. Whilst doing nothing is not an option, we recommended the government should instead support the UK’s strong copyright framework by encouraging collective and transactional copyright licensing.    

Licensing underpinned by meaningful transparency is mutually beneficial for the creative and AI sectors: creators could be fairly remunerated and engage with AI tools without concerns about copyright-related risks, and AI companies can develop engaging commercial products that support creativity. We hope the Labour government will listen to the concerns of creatives, and place the onus on AI developers to produce transparency models that can facilitate licensing.  

“Another aspect highlighted by the copyright and artificial intelligence consultation, is the need for greater support for freelancers, including visual artists. DACS joins Creative UK in supporting calls for a Freelancer Commissioner. In September, the Government’s response to the CMS committee’s Creator Remuneration report confirmed that this proposal would be assessed by the Good Work Review Task and Finish Group, led by DCMS and the BFI, as part of a sub-group looking to establish an IP Education and Advocacy Programme for the self-employed.

“Amidst the fierce debates about the future of copyright protection and creative livelihoods one thing is certain – the Labour government must do more to support freelance creatives, and enabling them to monetise their IP is essential in this. That’s why DACS has continued to campaign for the introduction of the Smart Fund, as recommended by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee. This could inject £300m into the UK’s creative industries without cost to treasury or taxpayer, and accelerate Labour’s pledge to grow the creative sector.”