Paul McCartney and Dua Lipa back UK move against AI firms to reveal copyrighted training data

The House of Lords voted 272 to 125 for an amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill that would make AI firms list every copyrighted work used to train their systems after Paul McCartney, Dua Lipa, Ian McKellen, Elton John, and hundreds of other creative figures.

According to The Verge report, the open letter, organised by cross‑bench peer Baroness Beeban Kidron, warned that allowing tech giants to copy righted material in secret would throw away “an immense growth opportunity.”

It said the United Kingdom could lose future earnings, its standing as a “creative powerhouse,” and the chance to build technology that reflects British laws and values. Media groups, music publishers, and arts bodies, more than 400 signatories in all, also backed the demand. They argue that clear rules will “spur a dynamic licensing market” and keep human creativity at the heart of British culture.

Kidron told peers before the vote, “My lords, it is an assault on the British economy and it is happening at scale to a sector worth £120 billion to the UK, an industry that is central to the industrial strategy and of enormous cultural import.” She said companies are “raiding” books, songs and images without paying or even asking.

The government opposes the new rule.

Ministers said the clash “is holding back both the creative and tech sectors and needs to be resolved by new legislation” . Because the Lords changed the bill , it now returns to the House of Commons, where MPs can keep or strike out the amendment. A final decision may come within weeks.

U.S is also facing a similar copyright demand against AI

On 18 March Paul McCartney, Cynthia Erivo, Chris Rock and more than 400 entertainers asked the Trump administration to defend existing U.S. copyright law against AI training practices. “We firmly believe that America’s global AI leadership must not come at the expense of our essential creative industries,” their letter said.

Two days earlier, on 13 March, Google joined OpenAI in submitting policy papers that call for a wider reading of the U.S. “fair use” doctrine, letting developers copy copyrighted material more freely when building models. The proposals arrived as the White House drafted its “AI Action Plan,” due by mid‑2025.

In February, the administration had invited public comments on the plan, saying it would set “priority policy actions” for America’s place in the world AI race.

The debate sharpened when Acting Librarian of Congress Robert Newlen told staff that Shira Perlmutter, head of the U.S. Copyright Office, had been removed from her post. Only days earlier, her office released a report questioning whether using copyrighted works in AI training fits fair‑use law, a finding that alarmed many large developers.

OpenAI, Meta, and other AI leaders already face lawsuits in U.S. courts from writers, artists, and news outlets who say their work was copied without permission. The British amendment aims to stop similar disputes before they spread. Supporters argue that mandatory disclosure will let creators negotiate licences—or sue—if their material is used.

For now, all eyes are on Westminster. If MPs keep the Lords’ wording, Britain would become one of the first major economies to force transparency on AI training data. If they strip it out, campaigners promise to keep pressing. As Kidron told peers, how AI is built “and who it benefits are two of the most important questions of our time.”

Cryptopolitan Academy: Coming Soon - A New Way to Earn Passive Income with DeFi in 2025. Learn More