The Future of AI and Copyright Regulation in the UK: The Data (Use and Access) Bill finally gets Lords approval in the UK

On 11 June 2025, the House of Lords approved the Data (Use and Access) Bill, ending discussions about its implications for AI and copyright. Originally, the Bill focused on personal data issues; promoting economic growth, enhancing public services, and simplifying lives in the UK. Notably, it also includes provisions for bereaved parents to access their deceased children's data.

However, the Bill became intertwined with AI and copyright debates when Baroness Kidron introduced Amendment 49 on 12 May 2025. This amendment proposed transparency requirements for AI developers to disclose the data used in training their models.  The proposed transparency requirement related to all data types, not just personal data.

The AI Consultation

The UK government launched a consultation on AI and copyright at the end of 2024 (Consultation). It suggested four options to balance the protection of copyright in creative works, and the desire to encourage AI development and deployment in the UK. We reported that the Consultation closed with over 11,500 individual contributions - showing the strength of feeling around this topic. Our full analysis of the Consultation can be found here[A1].  There is currently no formal response from the government since the Consultation closed in February 2025. 

The Kidron Amendment 

The amendment by Baroness Kidron in the House of Lords aimed to highlight concerns about AI models being trained on copyrighted works without transparency. High-profile creatives, including Sir Elton John, supported these concerns, urging updates to UK copyright laws to safeguard creative works from unauthorised AI use.

The House of Commons opposed the transparency requirement, deeming it unnecessary due to an agreed economic impact assessment on AI's use of copyrighted works. Baroness Kidron argued that transparency offers the creative industries a greater means to protect their creative works.

The opinions of the House of Lords have been echoed by others in the creative sector too. At the recent Westminster Forum ‘Priorities for the creative industries’ event, the Design and Artists Copyright Society stressed that the central issue for members is transparency over how models are being trained and whether artists’ works are being used for training purposes. The Society argued that transparency would offer a more level playing field to negotiate a funding model between creatives and AI developers for the use of copyrighted works.

The transparency issue is not straightforward.  In Google’s response to the Consultation, they argued that transparency requirements, which are due into force in the EU on 2 August 2025, could be damaging for AI developers as they may have to share trade secrets by disclosing what data they are training their models on. 

TechUK has stated that requirements to disclose training data could disincentivise international companies from investing and developing a range of tech products in the UK, including AI technology.

Despite the fact that the Bill was predominantly focused on important changes relating to personal data; the AI amendments tabled by Baroness Kidron were timely, and aimed at bringing the AI and copyright conversation to the legislative agenda ahead of the outcomes of the Consultation. 

So what now ?

After much debate between the House of Lords and the Commons, the Data (Use and Access) Bill is poised to receive royal assent.

Despite the Bill's primary focus on personal data, Baroness Kidron's amendments brought AI and copyright issues to the legislative agenda. However, the final version of the Bill, approved by the Lords on 11 June, excluded the transparency requirement  proposed in her amendment. Instead, the Bill does extend the economic impact assessment requirement over the four options in the Consultation to also include overseas companies.

In the debate on 11 June, some Lords expressed concern and disappointment that the transparency issue was not included. Baroness Kidron said a solution to this issue “will take years to deliver”, while Baroness Jones, a DSIT Minister, reiterated that the Government “cannot prejudge the consultation, technical or parliamentary working groups or the proposals resulting from these that will be brought forward in our report”.

So, while transparency around the use of copyright-protected works to train AI models will not be addressed in this Bill, this issue will not go away. 

In the meantime, Baroness Kidron’s amendment will ensure the Government is required to publish an economic impact assessment on each of the four policy options in the Consultation (including AI systems developed overseas) within nine months of the Bill receiving royal assent. 

The UK Government are also expected to publish a response to the Consultation in the coming months.

Rebecca Steer is a Partner in the Commercial team and was an invited speaker at the recent Westminster Forum ‘Priorities for the creative industries’.

#AIRegulation #CopyrightLaw #DataBill #UKLegislation #CreativeIndustries #AITransparency #TechPolicy #Innovation #DigitalRights #Law

 [A1]Link to: UK Government’s Consultation on Copyright and AI: What’s Next for AI Developers and Creators?