The Premier League has criticised ministers over their proposed reforms to copyright law, The Times can reveal.
The reforms are designed to attract AI companies to the UK and have been met with a backlash from the creative industries, led by artists including Sir Elton John. However, opposition from the league has not been made public until now.
The league’s submission to a government consultation on the issue, obtained by The Times under Freedom of Information laws, questions whether ministers had considered the impact of the changes on the league and sports industry.
Sir Elton John has been a vocal critic of plans to change copyright laws to boost AI companies Harry Durrant/Getty Images
It notes that the government talks about “various creative industries, but surprisingly does not mention the sports sector. We therefore question whether the contribution of the Premier League, and the UK sports sector more generally … has properly been taken into account.”
The league says it is one of the UK’s biggest and most popular global exports and the most-watched sports league in the world. It claims to support 90,000 jobs and generates £8 billion in “gross value added” to the UK economy per year.
The submission says that “strong copyright protections have been fundamental to the Premier League’s success” and expresses concern that any exceptions given to AI companies could be exploited by pirates of football content.
One of the government’s former proposals, to allow AI companies to take copyrighted works without permission unless the rights holder opts out, is singled out for criticism.
It “risks undermining the UK’s creative economy by weakening the IP [intellectual property] framework that has made its sports broadcasting a global leader”, the league says.
This has now been dropped by the government which is still exploring a possible exception for AI companies from copyright law in other circumstances.
The league says the use by AI companies of copyrighted works without permission to develop software “is being presented by some as being ‘acceptable’ when undertaken by AI companies due to, broadly, the potential economic significance of AI companies basing themselves and/or operating in the UK. However, the wholesale infringement of multiple third parties’ works would not be tolerated in any other context”.
The league calls for “a well-structured licensing approach” with “appropriate remuneration” for rights holders. Key to this, it argues, is: “AI providers need to be transparent about the third party intellectual property they have used to train their models”.
This has always been resisted by the tech industry which sees it as a threat to commercial secrets and infeasible given the extent of works used.
However the league says the “obligation to be transparent about what specific works have been used [and how] should be absolute”.
This obligation should be statutory and backed up by criminal penalties with personal liability for directors of AI companies for non-compliance, the league argues.
The submission concludes: “The UK is home to some of the world’s most valuable IP rights (including Premier League content and live event data), which are highly sought-after all over the world. The government therefore has an opportunity to make it clear to AI providers that if they want to access this content, that they must comply with UK copyright law.
“That should include clear obligations on providers to comply with UK law even if AI models are used in the UK but trained outside of the UK, so as to prevent providers from importing a pre-trained AI model into the UK which would infringe UK copyright.”
In its last update to parliament, the government said that it “no longer has a preferred option” for what to do next on the reforms.
Ed Newton-Rex, a former AI executive and campaigner for creatives’ rights, said: “This shows what a huge error of judgment the government’s proposals were — to have angered everyone from Elton John to the Premier League is astonishing.
Ed Newton-Rex
“Copyright is not some minor annoyance to be cast aside at the first sign of money from big tech; it is the bedrock of so many of our great industries. We need a government that will protect the UK’s incredibly valuable cultural and sporting assets, rather than one that seems desperate to give them away in the name of ‘progress’.”
A government spokesman said: “We are putting in the work so that both the creative and technical sectors, including the sports industry, can flourish in this country.
Football newsletter
Learn something new about the beautiful game with James Gheerbrant’s bespoke analysis.
Sign up with one click
“Following our consultation and extensive engagement across industry, we have already confirmed that the government no longer has a preferred option.
“It will take time to get this right. We have identified four areas where we will focus the next phase of this work, including on digital replicas, labelling AI generated content, creator control and transparency, and support for smaller and independent creatives to license their content. We will continue to work closely with all stakeholders throughout this process.”