The league\u2019s 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.<\/p>\n
![\"Elton](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/f66d2340-e7d8-42c1-95bd-b3cfebf104f3.jpg\")
Sir Elton John has been a vocal critic of plans to change copyright laws to boost AI companies Harry Durrant\/Getty Images<\/p>\n
It notes that the government talks about \u201cvarious 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 \u2026 has properly been taken into account.\u201d<\/p>\n
The league says it is one of the UK\u2019s biggest and most popular global exports and the most-watched sports league in the world. It claims to support 90,000 jobs and generates \u00a38 billion in \u201cgross value added\u201d to the UK economy per year.<\/p>\n
The submission says that \u201cstrong copyright protections have been fundamental to the Premier League\u2019s success\u201d and expresses concern that any exceptions given to AI companies could be exploited by pirates of football content. <\/p>\n
One of the government\u2019s former proposals, to allow AI companies to take copyrighted works without permission unless the rights holder opts out, is singled out for criticism.<\/p>\n
It \u201crisks undermining the UK\u2019s creative economy by weakening the IP [intellectual property] framework that has made its sports broadcasting a global leader\u201d, the league says.<\/p>\n
This has now been dropped by the government which is still exploring a possible exception for AI companies from copyright law in other circumstances.<\/p>\n
The league says the use by AI companies of copyrighted works without permission to develop software \u201cis being presented by some as being \u2018acceptable\u2019 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\u2019 works would not be tolerated in any other context\u201d.<\/p>\n
The league calls for \u201ca well-structured licensing approach\u201d with \u201cappropriate remuneration\u201d for rights holders. Key to this, it argues, is: \u201cAI providers need to be transparent about the third party intellectual property they have used to train their models\u201d.<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
However the league says the \u201cobligation to be transparent about what specific works have been used [and how] should be absolute\u201d.<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
The submission concludes: \u201cThe UK is home to some of the world\u2019s 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.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat 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.\u201d<\/p>\n
In its last update to parliament, the government said that it \u201cno longer has a preferred option\u201d for what to do next on the reforms.<\/p>\n
![\"Headshot](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/d63cfa4d-a9ff-4496-b7bf-7b2cd0a27819.jpg\")
Ed Newton-Rex<\/p>\n