Source URL: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jan/29/baroness-kidron-speech/
Source: Simon Willison’s Weblog
Title: Baroness Kidron’s speech regarding UK AI legislation
Feedly Summary: Baroness Kidron’s speech regarding UK AI legislation
Barnstormer of a speech by UK film director and member of the House of Lords Baroness Kidron. This is the Hansard transcript but you can also watch the video on parliamentlive.tv. She presents a strong argument against the UK’s proposed copyright and AI reform legislation, which would provide a copyright exemption for AI training with a weak-toothed opt-out mechanism.
The Government are doing this not because the current law does not protect intellectual property rights, nor because they do not understand the devastation it will cause, but because they are hooked on the delusion that the UK’s best interests and economic future align with those of Silicon Valley.
She throws in some cleverly selected numbers:
The Prime Minister cited an IMF report that claimed that, if fully realised, the gains from AI could be worth up to an average of £47 billion to the UK each year over a decade. He did not say that the very same report suggested that unemployment would increase by 5.5% over the same period. This is a big number—a lot of jobs and a very significant cost to the taxpayer. Nor does that £47 billion account for the transfer of funds from one sector to another. The creative industries contribute £126 billion per year to the economy. I do not understand the excitement about £47 billion when you are giving up £126 billion
And this superb closing line:
The spectre of AI does nothing for growth if it gives away what we own so that we can rent from it what it makes.
According to Ed Newton-Rex the speech was effective:
She managed to get the House of Lords to approve her amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill, which among other things requires overseas gen AI companies to respect UK copyright law if they sell their products in the UK. (As a reminder, it is illegal to train commercial gen AI models on ©️ work without a licence in the UK.)
What’s astonishing is that her amendments passed despite @UKLabour reportedly being whipped to vote against them, and the Conservatives largely abstaining. Essentially, Labour voted against the amendments, and everyone else who voted voted to protect copyright holders.
I’m trying to understand if this amendment could make existing products such as ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini illegal to sell in the UK. How about usage of open weight models?
Via @ednewtonrex
Tags: politics, ethics, generative-ai, training-data, ai, copyright
AI Summary and Description: Yes
Summary: Baroness Kidron’s speech on UK AI legislation critiques proposed copyright reforms that favor AI training exemption at the cost of safeguarding intellectual property. Her effective arguments highlight potential job losses and economic impacts while emphasizing the need for AI companies to adhere to UK copyright laws, especially for generative AI.
Detailed Description: Baroness Kidron’s speech is a critical examination of the UK’s proposed copyright and AI reform legislation. Key points include:
– **Argument Against Copyright Exemption**: The proposed legislation includes a copyright exemption for AI training that Kidron argues is detrimental. She asserts that the government is misguided in its belief that aligning with Silicon Valley’s interests will benefit the UK’s economy in the long run.
– **Economic Implications**:
– The Prime Minister cited an IMF report projecting AI could contribute up to £47 billion annually to the UK economy, but Kidron counterpoints that this figure comes with a potential 5.5% increase in unemployment—equating to significant job losses and financial burdens on taxpayers.
– She highlights the creative industries’ substantial contribution of £126 billion per year, questioning the trade-off of losing creative rights for a fraction of potential AI gains.
– **Call for Stronger Copyright Protections**: Kidron’s amendments to the Data (Use and Access) Bill emphasize the necessity for overseas generative AI companies to respect UK copyright laws when selling their products. This includes the stipulation that commercial AI models must not train on copyrighted works without a license.
– **Impact on AI Products**: There is concern articulated regarding whether this amendment could render widely used AI products like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini illegal in the UK, especially for those utilizing open weight models.
– **Political Context**: Even amidst opposition—where Labour reportedly voted against the amendments and Conservatives abstained—Kidron managed to secure approval of her amendments, demonstrating significant political maneuvering and concern regarding safeguarding intellectual property.
This discourse is highly relevant for security professionals focused on compliance and governance, particularly in navigating the intersections of AI technology, intellectual property rights, and regulatory landscapes. The implications of these legislative changes could shape the data protection responsibilities of AI developers and the legal liabilities of using AI technologies within the UK.