8 January 2026
TDM and training AI models: UK Government provides updated statement on copyright and AI
On 15 December 2025, the UK Government's Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) and Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) published a joint Statement of Progress as required by section 137 Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (DUAA 2025) (the Joint Statement).
The joint statement provides an interim update on the work of the two departments following the UK Government's public consultation on 'Copyright and Artificial Intelligence' which took place between 17 December 2024 and 25 February 2025 (Copyright and AI Consultation) as they prepare to publish in Spring 2026 their (i) economic impact assessment (as required by section 135 DUAA 2025) (Impact Assessment); and (ii) report on the use of copyright works in the development of AI systems (as required by section 136 DUAA 2025) (Report).
EXISTING UK TDM EXCEPTION
By way of brief recap, under the UK's existing copyright regime, section 29A of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA) provides (following amendment in 2014, long before the current debate on AI) a copyright exception which allows text and data mining (TDM) for non-commercial purposes only and in circumstances where: (i) the user has lawful access to the copyright work (e.g. by virtue of a licence or permission in the terms and conditions); (ii) there is sufficient acknowledgment; and (iii) it is otherwise dealt with in accordance with the rules contained in this provision (such as the requirement for the copy of the copyright work to have not been transferred to another person) (Existing TDM Exception). This means that copyright works protected under the CDPA cannot be used for commercial TDM purposes without the authorisation of the rights holder unless one of the other exceptions under the CDPA applies.
PROPOSALS FOR REFORM
In the Copyright and AI Consultation, the UK Government consulted on four options to retain or amend the Existing UK TDM Exception. In summary, to:
- maintain the status quo (i.e. do nothing and retain the Existing Narrow TDM Exception) (Do Nothing (Option 0));
- strengthen copyright by making it a requirement to have a licence to use copyright protected works in all circumstances (Strengthen Copyright (Option 1));
- introduce a broad data mining exception without an “opt out” (Broad Exception (Option 2)); or
- introduce a broad data mining exception that allows rights holders to reserve their rights, underpinned by supporting measures on transparency (Broad Exception with “opt out” (Option 3)).
In the Copyright and AI Consultation, the UK Government indicated that the Broad Exception with “opt out” (Option 3), was its preferred proposal. This proposal appears to be a middle ground from the UK IPO's previous (now abandoned) proposal in June 2022 to introduce a broad TDM exception, to allow TDM for any purpose (including a commercial one) without granting the rights holder any ability to “opt out” (2022 Proposal). As per our previous article here, the 2022 Proposal was ultimately abandoned after it received widespread criticism from rights holder groups, particularly within the creative industry over loss of revenue, especially given that some rights holders would have already had existing TDM licences in place.
In proposing a Broad Exception with “opt out” (Option 3), the UK Government drew parrels with the similar exception which applies in the EU, as provided by Article 4 of the Digital Single Market Copyright Directive (Directive (EU) 2019/790) (DSM Directive), which allows reproductions and extractions of lawfully accessible copyright works and database rights for the purpose of TDM generally, including for commercial purposes. As with the exception under Article 4 of DSM Directive, the Broad Exception with “opt out” (Option 3) would apply to all copyright protected content unless the rights holder has pro-actively taken steps to “opt out” of the exception by expressly reserving their rights. In other words, as under the DSM Directive (and now also confirmed in the context of generative AI in the EU AI Act, although also being considered in that context in various active European cases), in the absence of an opt out, content (which is protected as a copyright work or by database rights and which is lawfully available on the internet could be freely extracted and reproduced including for commercial TDM purposes.
RESPONSE TO COPYRIGHT AND AI CONSULTATION
Despite appearing to seek a middle ground from the 2022 Proposal (reformulated in the Copyright and AI Consultation as the Broad Exception), the Broad Exception with “opt out” (Option 3) also appears to have attracted widespread criticism, particularly amongst the creative sectors.
In the Joint Statement, the UK Government confirms that it received just over 11,500 responses to the Copyright and AI Consultation from a range of stakeholders including: creators and right holders, developers of AI models and applications, academics, researchers, cultural heritage organisations and legal professionals.
Of those who responded to via the government’s online survey service:
- 7% of respondents supported the proposal to Do Nothing;
- 88% of respondents supported the proposal to Strengthen Copyright;
- 5% of respondents supported the proposal to introduce a Broad Exception;
- 3% of the respondents supported the proposal to introduce a Broad Exception with “opt out”; and
- 5% of the respondents did not indicate a preferred option.
In presenting the response, the UK Government comments that the distribution of preferences partly reflects the large responses to the consultation from individual creators and the creative industries and that when considering responses from different sectors, most of those from the creative industries were strongly against the UK Government's favoured option, the Broad Exception with “opt out” (Option 3) and the favoured Strengthen Copyright (Option 1) proposals. By contrast, respondents from the technology sector, including AI developers, favoured the Broad Exception with “opt out” (Option 3) and the Broad Exception (Option 2). The UK Government also explains that there were also numerous modified/alternative proposals submitted (e.g. more targeted exceptions for research purposes).
Additionally, the UK Government explains that from the responses there was also strong support across the creative industries for the introduction of statutory transparency measures in relation to AI training to support the licensing of copyright works. By contrast, respondents from the tech sector had mixed views on transparency, with many supporting non-legislative approaches or light-touch regulation. All respondents (regardless of preference to the four options) also generally expressed a clear desire that future changes should minimise additional administrative or financial burdens.
Stakeholder Engagement
Following the closing of the Copyright and AI Consultation, the UK Government has continued to engage with stakeholders (and the views of these groups will be reflected in the report) including:
- The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport who have convened 3 roundtables (in July and September 2025) bringing together representatives of the creative, media, and AI sectors and academia;
- convening expert technical working group meetings (in November and December 2025) consisting of 50 members (with relevant expertise including rightsholders, researchers, academics to technology, including AI developers) to discuss the following themes: (i) control and technical standards, (ii) information transparency, (iii) licensing and (iv) wider support for creatives; and
- The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport convened cross-party Parliamentary working group meetings in October to November 2025.
Impact Assessment
The UK Government is now required to publish an Impact assessment which will build on the impacts of the proposed reforms which were identified in the UK Government's 'Summary Assessment of Options' (published 17 December 2024). Work on the Impact Assessment is already underway and will consider the evidence submitted to it as part of the Copyright and AI Consultation and stakeholder engagement, as well as wider evidence (such as evolving AI activity in the UK, the licensing market, emerging research and developments in other jurisdictions such as the EU).
For a more detailed discussion on the Broad Exception with “opt out” (Option 3), the UK Government's preferred proposal, see our previous articles on the topic of Training AI Models (here and here), where we discuss the potentially significant impact on: (i) the revenue that can be generated from copyright licensing (which obviously presents a risk if rights holders are not aware of the exception and fail to expressly “opt out” especially given that once data is extracted from a website the duration of the TDM exception is unlimited) (ii) operational costs of both rights holders (in exercising the right to “opt out”) and (iii) additional operational costs of AI developers (in complying with the “opt out“ and enhanced transparency obligations).
Report
The UK Government is also preparing the Report which will set out in detail the responses to the Copyright and AI Consultation and consider each of the four options (see above) proposed in the Copyright and AI Consultation.
In particular, the UK Government will consider and make the following proposals in the report in relation to:
- the technical measures and standards that may be used to control the use of, and access to, copyright works to develop AI systems;
- the effect of copyright and access to, and use of, data by developers of AI systems (e.g. on TDM);
- the disclosure of information by developers of AI systems about their use of, and access to, copyright works for the purpose of developing those systems;
- the granting of copyright licensed to developers of AI systems; and
- enforcement of rules relating to the use of, and access to, copyright works to develop AI systems, including enforcement by a regulator.
Notably, the UK Government has also indicated that it may consider and make alternative proposals in the report to the four consulted on in the Copyright and AI Consultation (it is possible that some of the alternative proposals put forward by respondents will be further considered here). In preparing the report, consideration will be given to AI systems developed in the UK and overseas, and the likely effect on individuals, micro, small and medium-sized businesses.
WHAT CAN WE EXPECT NEXT?
As required by Sections 135 and 136 of the DUAA 2025, the Impact Assessment and Report will be laid before Parliament (and therefore become public having been made available to members of Parliament to inform their deliberations on the reforms) by 18 March 2026.
LIKE TO READ MORE ON THIS TOPIC?
We have previously written about the UK TDM and EU TDM exceptions in the context of Training AI models: