Opinions on UK Open Consultation on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence

This short survey seeks your views on how the UK should handle AI and copyright.

The UK is revisiting this question which currently sees a lot of tension between creative industries and AI development. There are also inconsistency between UK law and EU/US. With a new Labour government in power, the consultation is back under the spotlight and is seeking public input.

You can learn more by reading the official consultation or a summary blog post.

Any answers may be publicized and submitted to the UK government.

Your citizenship:

Prefer not to say

Other

Please rank the following objectives from 1 (highest priority) to 5 (lowest priority)

These are the main goals the UK consultation says they aim to balance when addressing AI and copyright.

Protecting Creators’ Rights – (They can control and monetise their works)

Promoting AI Innovation – (Encourage development/adoption of AI in the UK)

Fostering UK Competitiveness - (Attract investment, keep pace with EU/US)

Driving Economic Growth – (Boost jobs & productivity)

Ensuring Transparency & Trust – (Everyone knows how data/outputs are used)

Which approach should the UK adopt for AI training on copyrighted works?

This is one of the primary decision points and mimics the consultation's proposed options.

Keep current UK law where only research is exempted (Pros: No new rules; Cons: Continues uncertainty, no extra clarity for creators or AI)

Require licensing for all AI training (Pros: Creators are paid; Cons: Could drive AI firms away, hurting UK competitiveness)

Broad “free” access with no licensing (Pros: Maximum freedom for AI; Cons: Creators lose control & revenue)

An opt-out system, plus transparency (Pros: Balanced approach; Cons: Puts burden on creators to opt out.)

Other

Please Specify :

How concerned are you about “research-washing”—i.e., institutions training AI models under a non-commercial label and then monetizing them?

Very concerned – it undermines the entire licensing system

Somewhat concerned – but it might be overblown

Not really concerned – such scenarios are rare or manageable

Not sure

Other

Please Specify :

How much should AI developers have to disclose about which works they use for training?

Full Disclosure (List all or most sources. Ensures creators know if they’re included, but may be very burdensome or reveal trade secrets)

Partial / Summarized Disclosure (Broad categories or representative examples. Less burden for AI developers, but creators lose some detail)

No Mandatory Disclosure (Developers can keep sources private. Protects their IP but leaves creators in the dark.)

Unsure / need more context

Other

Please Specify :

Which option do you prefer for purely AI-generated works?

Currently, Section 9(3) CDPA gives 50-year copyright to a computer-generated work (CGW) with no human author—unlike the EU/US, which typically do not. This is one of the primary decision points and mimics the consultation's proposed options.

Maintain the current provision (Pro: Could encourage AI outputs; Con: Many find it odd to have copyright with no human creator.)

Reform – clarify, but keep some form of CGW protection (Maybe shorten copyright term or better define “originality.”)

Remove machine-only copyright (No human = no copyright, aligns with US/EU. Could deter some AI usage but clarifies “human-only” principle.)

Not sure / need more info

Other

Please Specify :

Do you believe transparency measures (like disclosing training data sources or opting out via metadata) can realistically build trust without overburdening small AI firms or creators?

Yes – it’s vital for fairness, can be made workable with standard formats

Not entirely – large players might comply, but smaller ones could struggle

No – it’s too fragmented and difficult to enforce

Unsure

Other

Please Specify :

Which policy on labeling AI-generated content do you support?

Mandatory Labeling for All AI Outputs (Strong transparency, but potentially burdensome for minor edits or partial AI assistance.)

Mandatory Labeling Only in Certain Use-Cases (For example, if it’s heavily AI-generated or used commercially. Less universal but still offers transparency.)

Voluntary Guidelines (Self-Regulation) (Companies encouraged to label, but no legal mandate. Some might skip it.)

No Labeling Requirement (No official rules. Pro: Freedoms remain; Con: Public may be misled.)

Not sure / need more info

Other

Please Specify :

Do we need additional rules to handle AI outputs that infringe copyright?

No – Existing Law is Sufficient (Straight copying is illegal; new laws might overcomplicate things.)

Yes – We Need Specific AI Legislation (Could address large-scale automated copying or clarifying who’s liable. Cons: More regulation might slow innovation.)

Unsure / need more details

Should the UK introduce new personality rights so individuals can block AI replicas of their image or voice, or are existing protections (passing off, etc.) enough?

AI can clone a person’s likeness or voice (“deepfakes”). Existing laws (defamation, data protection, etc.) may not fully address unauthorized use of someone’s persona. Some want brand-new personality rights.

Strong new “Personality Rights” (Pros: People can stop unauthorized digital clones. Cons: Big legal changes, might hamper some creative parody.)

Minor tweaks to existing laws (Pros: Less drastic than new rights. Cons: May still leave gaps in protecting individuals.)

No change (Pros: Avoid over-regulation. Cons: Some victims of deepfakes have limited options.)

Unsure / need more info

Other

Please Specify :

Which assumption do you find most persuasive? (Select all that apply)

AI’s growth is critical for the UK’s global competitiveness

We need simpler, clearer legal rules to reduce uncertainty

Transparency is essential to build trust between creators and AI developers

Opt-out mechanisms are crucial to balancing competing interests

Other

Please Specify :

Which best describes your background or interest in AI and copyright?

I’m a creator (e.g., artist, writer, performer)

I’m an AI/tech professional (e.g., developer, data scientist, tech entrepreneur)

I’m a student or researcher (e.g., academic, education sector)

General public (not directly involved in AI or creative industries)

Other

Please Specify :

Final Comments or Suggestions?

Any additional thoughts on balancing innovation vs. Economic growth vs. Creator protection? If you want to comment on “burden on creators” vs. “burden on AI developers” or how to keep the UK competitive, share here!

Opinions on UK Open Consultation on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence

More Surveys