Why the UK government’s love-in with Taylor Swift is coming to an end

LONDON — Keir Starmer may pose as a committed Swiftie — but that doesn’t mean the British prime minister has the American megastar’s best interests at heart.
Despite snapping up freebie tickets to see Taylor Swift in London this June — and sparking a massive political row in the process — Starmer’s new Labour government is preparing to water down the protections that prevent artists’ work being gobbled up by tech firms to train their latest artificial intelligence models in the U.K.
Don’t expect the music industry to just shake it off.
Against the promise of investment and innovation from AI firms, groups representing artists and publishers have been pulling out the stops to remind politicians of the economic and cultural value of the U.K.’s creative sector — built, they say, on the foundations of a clear intellectual property regime.
That message has been backed up with free tickets, glitzy invites and access to celebrities, as well as a major presence at Labour’s party conference in Liverpool last month. Swift even bagged a royal-style police escort for her U.K. stadium dates.
The Swift tickets came from Universal Music, one of the U.K.’s biggest music companies. It is lobbying against changes to the U.K.’s copyright regime that could make it easier for AI firms to train their models on copyrighted work without a license.
Last week it was reported that Home Secretary Yvette Cooper also received complimentary Swift tickets from Universal through her husband, former Labour MP Ed Balls.
Warner Music, meanwhile, gifted Chris Bryant — a minister across both the tech and culture departments who attended roundtables on the U.K.’s copyright framework last month — two tickets to see the Pet Shop Boys in July, according to his register of interests.
Industry body UK Music gifted Bryant two tickets to the BRIT Awards in March, before the election, valued at £3,000. Steve Reed, now the U.K.’s environment secretary, was comped tickets from UK Music to see Kylie Minogue in Hyde Park in July.
There’s no suggestion that the freebies were provided in return for assurances on the government’s copyright policy.
But showering Starmer and senior ministers with gifts would only have served to emphasize the sector’s message: That undermining the U.K.’s outsize cultural sector in the hopes of uncertain investment from foreign AI firms would be a mistake.
That message seems to have partially landed. Monday’s much-hyped U.K. International Investment Summit included a session on Britain’s “Creative Assets” featuring the boss of the Universal Music Group Lucian Grainge — and the sector was singled out as one of eight U.K. in the government’s draft industrial strategy.
But the sector’s legal foundations could soon face upheaval as ministers prepare a consultation on reforming the U.K.’s copyright regime later this year.
“There would be a lot of concern about what we would consider watering down the copyright framework, if it isn’t then accompanied by appropriate safeguards,” Tom Kiehl, CEO of UK Music, said.
He warned the government against making “a big punt” on potential economic gains from AI “that’s not really realized,” while creative industries are worth over £100 billion to the U.K.’s economy each year.
“You risk endangering that economic success,” he cautioned.
So far, the mood music from Labour hasn’t been sweet.
Starmer’s decision to appoint Patrick Vallance as science minister was an early warning sign. As the government’s former chief science adviser, Vallance advocated for changes to Britain’s legal framework that would give AI companies free reign to use copyrighted work to train their models.
Last month, AI Minister Feryal Clark dropped the heaviest hint yet that the U.K. was leaning towards a liberalization of its copyright regime.
“There are real conflicts between the creative industries and AI companies. And you’ve got companies who can’t train their models in the U.K. because our regulation is so vague,” she said.
She’s since said the government is speaking to parties on both sides of the debate to find “a way forward” and would set out proposals “before the end of the year.”
A spokesperson for the U.K.’s technology department confirmed it had held recent roundtables on the issue and would “set out next steps as soon as possible,” adding that it was “determined to hear a broad range of views to help inform our approach.”
According to three people familiar with the issue and granted anonymity to speak about sensitive policy discussions, the Labour government will shortly consult on proposals that would allow AI firms to train models on copyrighted works for commercial purposes, unless rights holders expressly opt out.
It would be combined with new transparency obligations on AI firms to disclose what content their models have been trained on, though the scope of the requirements are unclear.
According to one of the people involved, who has represented the creative sector in policy discussions, Labour is determined to resolve the battle between rights holders and tech firms — a split which eluded the previous Conservative government, and which has sparked lawsuits by the likes of Getty Images and The New York Times in the U.K. and U.S. respectively.
In doing so, ministers are seeking to draw lessons from the European Union, the person said. The bloc has allowed text and data mining for commercial purposes unless rights holders opt out since 2018, and more recently introduced additional transparency obligations on AI firms through its AI Act. However, they noted that the EU’s approach is already facing criticism for being impractical.
Ministers are also desperate to draw investment from tech firms as the government looks to boost the U.K.’s growth and productivity.
AI firms have warned that countries which enforce strict copyright rules could miss out. Google recently claimed widespread adoption of AI could add £400 billion to the British economy by 2030 — but said the U.K. needed to take “swift action” to keep up with other jurisdictions by ensuring rules don’t hinder the ability of tech firms to develop models using copyrighted work.
But Labour could soon find itself with a powerful — and loud — enemy.
“While the British music industry is already embracing AI’s many positive use-cases, it is also our firm view that a broad copyright exception for text and data mining by AI firms would be hugely damaging to the U.K.’s creative industries,” Sophie Jones, chief strategy officer at the BPI, which represents U.K. record labels including Universal and Warner, said.
“If the U.K. is to remain a global creative powerhouse in an increasingly competitive world, the government must ensure that it is respected and enforced.”
Creative sector figures said relations with the party could sour if the government pushes proposals that threaten their business models.
“The last thing they want is the creative sector making a lot of noise,” the representative cited above said.
The next time Taylor Swift comes to the U.K., ministers might not be welcome.