The UK Parliament’s Upper Chamber has dealt a significant blow to the government’s plans to let artificial intelligence firms use copyright-protected work without permission, with a crossbench peer successfully pushing through an amendment requiring AI companies to reveal their use of copyrighted material. The bill will now return to the House of Commons, setting the stage for another confrontation in the Lords next week.
The House of Lords Pushes Back Against Government’s AI Plans
The government has suffered another setback in the House of Lords over its plans to let artificial intelligence firms use copyright-protected work without permission. This is the second time parliament’s upper house has demanded tech companies make clear whether they have used copyright-protected content.
The House of Lords is the upper chamber of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
It has a long history dating back to the 13th century, with its powers and composition evolving over time.
The House consists of approximately 790 members, including bishops, hereditary peers, life peers, and elected representatives.
Its primary functions include revising legislation, scrutinizing government policies, and providing a check on the power of the lower house, the House of Commons.
The amendment, tabled by crossbench peer Beeban Kidron, was passed by 272 votes to 125. It requires AI companies to reveal which copyrighted material is used in their models. The bill will now return to the House of Commons, and if the government removes the Kidron amendment, it will set the scene for another confrontation in the Lords next week.
Beeban Kidron is a British filmmaker and screenwriter known for her work in documentary and drama films.
Born in 1952, Kidron has directed several acclaimed documentaries, including 'Tribes' and 'In the Shadow of the Wind'.
Her feature film debut was with 'Bread and Roses', which premiered at the Berlin International Film Festival in 2000.
Kidron's work often explores themes of social justice, human rights, and women's empowerment.
Lady Kidron stated that she wants to reject the notion that those who are against government plans are against technology. She believes that creators do not deny the creative and economic value of AI but disagree with the assertion that they should have to build AI for free with their work, only to rent it back from those who stole it.
The main government proposal is to let AI firms use copyright-protected work without permission unless the copyright holders signal they do not want their work used in that process. Critics say this solution is impractical and unworkable. The government insists that the present situation is holding back both the creative and tech sectors and needs to be resolved by new legislation.
In a concession, the government has already tabled an economic impact assessment of its proposals. However, a source close to the tech secretary stated that the ‘opt out’ scenario was no longer preferred but one of several being considered. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology spokesperson said that the government would not rush any decisions on copyright or bring forward related legislation until they have a practical plan that delivers on their objectives.
The vote came days after hundreds of artists and organizations, including Paul McCartney, “give our work away at the behest of a handful of powerful overseas tech companies‘ , urged the prime minister not to ‘give our work away’ – as stated in Jeanette Winterson, Dua Lipa, and the Royal Shakespeare Company.
- theguardian.com | House of Lords pushes back against government’s AI plans
