AI Transparency Law Sparks Outcry from UK Musicians as Government Rejects Creative Industry Protections

Controversial UK AI Transparency Law Passes Amid Music Industry Backlash

On 19 June 2025, the UK government enacted the Data (Use and Access) Bill, a law regulating how data can be used to train artificial intelligence (AI) models. Despite strong opposition from prominent musicians like Elton John, Sir Paul McCartney, and Kate Bush, the bill became law after lengthy parliamentary debate.

The bill introduces protections for children's data and targets harmful AI-generated content such as ‘deepfakes.’ However, its most contentious aspect concerns tech companies' ability to use UK creatives’ works to train AI models without explicit permission, a move that sparked widespread alarm within the creative industries.

The Creative Sector’s Response

In October 2024, a statement opposing the unlicensed use of creative works for AI training gained traction, gathering over 50,000 signatures from artists including Björn Ulvaeus (ABBA), Sir John Rutter, and Sir Simon Rattle. They warned that such practices threaten the livelihoods of creators across music, film, and literature.

Baroness Beeban Kidron, a vocal advocate for UK creatives, proposed an amendment requiring businesses to disclose the data used for AI training, aiming to protect the sector that contributes £126 billion annually to the UK economy and supports 2.4 million jobs. Despite backing from over 400 creatives and an open letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, the amendment was ultimately rejected by the House of Commons.

Current Legal Landscape for Musicians

The law now allows AI businesses to use copyrighted works for training without mandatory transparency. Creators cannot verify if their work is being used without consent. The government plans to publish a report within nine months on AI training data usage and a progress update in six months, while reviewing over 13,000 public responses to its AI and copyright consultation.

Concerns remain high. Composer Thomas Hewitt Jones highlighted the delay risks as “big data companies are just stealing our work,” noting that current UK copyright laws do not effectively prevent unauthorized use by AI firms. Composer and campaigner Ed Newton-Rex emphasized the impact on human creators, warning that AI models trained on stolen work can outcompete musicians, especially those without household names.

Is AI ‘Stealing’ Music?

Ed Newton-Rex, who also founded an AI music company, argues that while AI and creatives could coexist, most AI firms currently use music without permission. This practice undermines musicians' income by flooding platforms with AI-generated content that cuts into royalty pools.

For instance, Spotify does not plan to ban AI-generated music outright but removes tracks that imitate existing artists. Meanwhile, TikTok has witnessed viral AI-generated hits, such as the fictional artist Vinih Pray’s song “A Million Colors,” which entered the TikTok Top 50 in March 2025. This trend concerns many in the industry who see it as diluting revenue for real creators.

Creative Industry Views on AI-Generated Music

Thomas Hewitt Jones described AI music as “quite grim,” criticizing it for rehashing past works without genuine innovation. He emphasized music’s unique ability to enrich the soul and expressed concern that government inaction allows this to continue unchecked.

Newton-Rex voiced disappointment in the government’s lack of support, pointing to an absent cultural leadership and warning that the creative sector risks alienation from the ruling party ahead of upcoming elections. The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) responded by affirming ongoing discussions with creative stakeholders to address copyright risks and promising to prioritize transparency and fair rewards.

What Musicians Can Do Now

Despite challenges, Newton-Rex encourages musicians to unite and resist exploitation by advocating for higher value on human-created art. He led the 2025 album Is This What We Want?, featuring 12 tracks of silence as a protest against unauthorized AI training, with 1,000 credited artists including Hans Zimmer and Max Richter.

The campaign drew significant media attention and public support. Polls consistently show the public favors requiring AI companies to seek permission and compensate creators for using their work.

Live Music: A Human Experience AI Can’t Replace

Live classical music remains largely unaffected by AI, offering an irreplaceable “soul-enriching” experience that technology cannot mimic. Hewitt Jones notes that people attend concerts for the unique human connection music provides, something AI cannot replicate at this stage.

Newton-Rex advises musicians to focus on what makes their art uniquely human and to create as much original work as possible. He sees this moment as potentially the last in history where artists can claim creation before AI-generated compositions become widespread.

For creatives seeking to deepen their knowledge on AI’s impact and navigate these changes, resources such as Complete AI Training offer relevant courses and insights tailored to creative professionals.