IPA Responds To Government Report On Copyright And Artificial Intelligence

The intersection of copyright law and artificial intelligence (AI) has become one of the most debated policy areas in the UK and globally. As governments attempt to strike a balance between innovation and creator rights, the stakes are incredibly high for industries such as advertising, publishing, music, film, and technology.
On 20 March 2026, the Institute of Practitioners in Advertising (IPA) publicly responded to the UK Government’s long-awaited report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, offering a measured yet critical perspective on the future of creative rights in the AI era.
Understanding the Government Report on Copyright and AI Before diving into the IPA’s response, it’s important to understand the context.
The uk news24x7 Government released its official report and impact assessment on 18 March 2026, following a major consultation launched in 2024.
Why This Report Matters Artificial intelligence systems—especially generative AI—depend on vast datasets, many of which include copyrighted materials such as:
Books Music Films Articles Images The central issue is simple but controversial:
👉 Should AI companies be allowed to use copyrighted works without permission?
Initially, the government proposed an "opt-out" model, where creators would need to actively prevent their work from being used.

However, this idea faced strong backlash from creative industries, forcing a policy rethink.
Key Highlights of the Government’s Position The March 2026 report signals a shift in tone and direction:
1. No Preferred Option (Policy Reset) The government stepped back from its earlier stance, acknowledging that there is no single solution to the AI-copyright dilemma.
2. Rejection of the Opt-Out Model The controversial opt-out approach—seen as favouring tech companies—has effectively been shelved.
3. Four Key Focus Areas Going Forward AI-generated content labelling Digital replicas and personality rights Transparency for AI training data Support for creators and SMEs 4. Continued Consultation The government plans to gather more evidence before making final decisions, indicating that regulation is still evolving.
IPA’s Response: A Balanced but Critical View The IPA, representing the UK’s advertising agencies, responded quickly after the report’s release.
Acknowledging Progress—but Highlighting Delays Richard Lindsay, Director of Legal & Public Affairs at the IPA, acknowledged the complexity of the issue but expressed disappointment over delays:
The consultation had been ongoing for over a year No definitive framework has yet been established Businesses still lack regulatory clarity 👉 This uncertainty affects advertising agencies, brands, and AI developers alike.
Support for Scrapping the Data Mining Exception One of the most important points in the IPA’s response is its support for abandoning the proposed expansion of text and data mining (TDM) exceptions.
What Was the Concern? The government had considered allowing AI companies to:
Use copyrighted materials freely Without requiring licenses Unless rights holders opted out This was widely criticised as unfair to creators.
IPA’s Position The IPA agrees with the decision to shelve this approach, noting that:
It would have triggered major backlash (which it did) It disproportionately benefited AI developers It risked undermining the creative economy The "AI Copyright Conundrum" Lindsay described the situation as an "AI/copyright conundrum", highlighting the inherent tension:
Creative Industry Needs AI Industry Needs Fair compensation Large datasets Copyright protection Open access to data Control over usage Speed of innovation This tension lies at the heart of the debate—and explains why policymakers are struggling to find consensus.