UK reverses course on AI copyright position after backlash; Engadget, March 18, 2026

 Will Shanklin , Engadget; UK reverses course on AI copyright position after backlash

"halk up a win for creative artists against AI companies. On Wednesday, the UK government abandoned its previous position on copyrighted works. It’s currently working on a data bill that, if unaltered, would have allowed AI companies like Google and OpenAI to train models on copyrighted materials without consent. Artists and other copyright holders would only have been offered a mere opt-out clause.

After significant backlash, the UK backed off from that position. "We have listened," Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said on Wednesday. However, the government’s new stance is, well, not a stance at all. It currently "no longer has a preferred option" about how to handle the issue.

Still, backpedaling from its previous position is viewed as a win for artists. UK Music CEO Tom Kiehl described the decision as "a major victory," while promising to work with the government on the next steps."

UK to rule out sweeping AI copyright overhaul; Politico, March 11, 2026

 JOSEPH BAMBRIDGE, Politico; UK to rule out sweeping AI copyright overhaul 

The U.K. will rule out making creatives actively opt out of having their copyrighted material scraped by AI companies.

"The U.K. government will rule out sweeping reform of its copyright laws in a highly-anticipated policy update next week, according to three people briefed on government thinking and granted anonymity to speak freely. 

The people said the update, due by March 18, will state the government does not plan to take forward work on an “opt out” model, whereby rights holders would have to explicitly say they do not want their work used to train AI models. 

It comes amid intense pressure from rights holders and lawmakers not to pursue the “opt out” policy. The government previously said this was its “preferred option” to facilitate AI innovation in the U.K., before ministers were forced to row back."

The Guardian view on changes to copyright laws: authors should be protected over big tech; The Guardian, March 13, 2026

 Editorial , The Guardian; The Guardian view on changes to copyright laws: authors should be protected over big tech

"In a scene that might have come from a dystopian novel, books were being stamped with “Human Authored” logos at this week’s London Book Fair. The Society of Authors described its labelling scheme as “an important sticking plaster to protect and promote human creativity in lieu of AI labelled content in the marketplace”.

Visitors to the fair were also being given copies of Don’t Steal This Book, an anthology of about 10,000 writers including Nobel laureate Kazuo Ishiguro, Malorie Blackman, Jeanette Winterson and Richard Osman, in which the pages are completely blank. The back cover states: “The UK government must not legalise book theft to benefit AI companies.” The message is clear: writers have had enough.

The fair comes the week before the government is due to deliver its progress report on AI and copyright, after proposals for a relaxation of existing laws caused outrage last year. Philippa Gregory, the novelist, described the plans for an “opt-out” policy, which puts the onus on writers to refuse permission for their work to be trawled, as akin to putting a sign on your front door asking burglars to pass by...

A House of Lords report published last week lays out two possible futures: one in which the UK “becomes a world-leading home for responsible, legalised artificial intelligence (AI) development” and another in which it continues “to drift towards tacit acceptance of large-scale, unlicensed use of creative content”. One scenario protects UK artists, the other benefits global tech companies. To avoid a world of empty content, the choice is clear."

Thousands of authors publish ‘empty’ book in protest over AI using their work; The Guardian, March 10, 2026

 Dan Milmo, The Guardian; Thousands of authors publish ‘empty’ book in protest over AI using their work

"Thousands of authors including Kazuo Ishiguro, Philippa Gregory and Richard Osman have published an “empty” book to protest against AI firms using their work without permission.

About 10,000 writers have contributed to Don’t Steal This Book, in which the only content is a list of their names. Copies of the work are being distributed to attenders at the London book fair on Tuesday, a week before the UK government is due to issue an assessment on the economic cost of proposed changes in copyright law."

Iceland Defeats Iceland: A U.K. Supermarket Ends a Trademark Dispute; The New York Times, March 5, 2026

 Jenny Gross , The New York Times; Iceland Defeats Iceland: A U.K. Supermarket Ends a Trademark Dispute

"Iceland, the Nordic nation, has prevailed over Iceland, the British supermarket chain specializing in frozen foods, ending a decadelong legal dispute over the supermarket’s exclusive rights to the “Iceland” name.

The trademark disagreement culminated this week when Richard Walker, the executive chairman of the grocery chain, said he would not appeal a European Union court decision that ruled in favor of the Icelandic government and canceled the chain’s trademark for “Iceland.”"

The Guardian view on the BBC World Service: this is London calling; The Guardian, February 13, 2026

Editorial,The Guardian; The Guardian view on the BBC World Service: this is London calling

[Kip Currier: This is the "money quote" for me in this persuasive Guardian Editorial on supporting the BBC World Service:

Accurate journalism is the strongest weapon in the war of information.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/feb/13/the-guardian-view-on-the-bbc-world-service-this-is-london-calling]

With just seven weeks before its funding runs out, the UK’s greatest cultural asset and most trusted international news organisation must be supported

"The programmes will neither be very interesting nor very good,” said the then BBC director general John Reith, when he launched its Empire Service in December 1932. Nearly a century later, the BBC World Service, as it is now known, broadcasts in 43 languages, reaches 313 million people a week and is one of the UK’s most influential cultural assets. It is also a lifeline for millions. “Perhaps Britain’s greatest gift to the world” in the 20th century, as Kofi Annan, the former UN secretary general, once put it.

But this week Tim Davie, the corporation’s director general, announced that the World Service will run out of funding in just seven weeks. Most of its £400m budget comes from the licence fee, although the Foreign Office – which funded it entirely until 2014 – contributed £137m in the last year. The funding arrangement with the Foreign Office finishes at the end of March. There is no plan for what happens next.

Meanwhile, Russia and China are pouring billions into state-run media. And American news organisations are crumbling under the Trump administration. Last week the Washington Post axed 300 jobs including its Ukraine reporter, and hundreds were lost at Voice of America, the closest US equivalent to the BBC, last year.

Although some question why licence-fee payers should subsidise services largely consumed abroad, it is also loved by many at home. In the small hours, it is a window on a dark world, an alternative to doomscrolling and a pushback against parochialism. Jeremy Paxman summed it up when he compared the World Service to a cords- and cardigan-wearing “ageing uncle who’s seen it all. It has a style that makes understatement seem like flamboyance”. But we should not allow this cosy, slightly fusty image to obscure its purpose.

For many it is not just life-enhancing, but life‑saving. Last month, during the internet blackout in Iran, the BBC’s Persian service provided additional radio programmes over shortwave and medium wave. Emergency services were also launched in response to conflicts in Ukraine, Syria, Gaza and Sudan, and after the earthquake in Myanmar. It remains the only international news organisation still broadcasting inside Afghanistan, setting up an education programme for Afghan children in 2024.

But it has been beleaguered by cuts, closures and job losses. In 2022, radio broadcasts in 10 languages including Arabic, Persian, Chinese and Bengali were replaced by digital services, a decision criticised for disproportionately affecting women, who rely most on radios. Wherever the BBC has been forced to withdraw – for financial or political pressures – propaganda has been quick to fill the gap.

No one doubts the World Service’s value as an instrument of soft power. But, as BBC bosses argue, it is also part of our national security. Accurate journalism is the strongest weapon in the war of information. The World Service must not be allowed to stumble into decline. Mr Davie is right – if optimistic – to urge the government to back it decisively and urgently.

During the second world war, radio was “scattering human voices into the darkness of Europe”, Penelope Fitzgerald wrote in her 1980 novel Human Voices, based on her time working for the BBC. Amid the AI noise and disinformation, the World Service must be enabled to keep scattering human voices in our own dark times."

X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok; BBC, February 3, 2026

Liv McMahon, BBC; X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok

"The French offices of Elon Musk's X have been raided by the Paris prosecutor's cyber-crime unit, as part of an investigation into suspected offences including unlawful data extraction and complicity in the possession of child pornography.

The prosecutor's office also said both Musk and former X chief executive Linda Yaccarino had been summoned to appear at hearings in April.

In a separate development, the UK's Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) announced a probe into Musk's AI tool, Grok, over its "potential to produce harmful sexualised image and video content."

X is yet to respond to either investigation - the BBC has approached it for comment."

Grok blocked from undressing images in places where it’s illegal, X says; AP, January 15, 2026

ELAINE KURTENBACH , AP; Grok blocked from undressing images in places where it’s illegal, X says

"Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok won’t be able to edit photos to portray real people in revealing clothing in places where that is illegal, according to a statement posted on X. 

The announcement late Wednesday followed a global backlash over sexualized images of women and children, including bans and warnings by some governments. 

The pushback included an investigation announced Wednesday by the state of California, the U.S.'s most populous, into the proliferation of nonconsensual sexually explicit material produced using Grok that it said was harassing women and girls.

Initially, media queries about the problem drew only the response, “legacy media lies.” 

Musk’s company, xAI, now says it will geoblock content if it violates laws in a particular place...

Malaysia and Indonesia took legal action and blocked access to Grok, while authorities in the Philippines said they were working to do the same, possibly within the week. The U.K. and European Union were investigating potential violations of online safety laws."

Britain seeks 'reset' in copyright battle between AI and creators; Reuters, January 13, 2026

 Reuters; Britain seeks 'reset' in copyright battle between AI and creators

"British technology minister Liz Kendall said on Tuesday the government was seeking a "reset" on plans to overhaul copyright rules to accommodate artificial intelligence, pledging to protect creators while unlocking AI's economic potential.

Creative industries worldwide are grappling with legal and ethical challenges posed by AI systems that generate original content after being trained on popular works, often without compensating the original creators."

What unites Greenland, Venezuela and Ukraine? Trump’s immoral lies and Europe’s chronic weakness; The Guardian, January 11, 2026

Simon Tisdall, The Guardian; What unites Greenland, Venezuela and Ukraine? Trump’s immoral lies and Europe’s chronic weakness

 "Donald Trump made 30,573 “false or misleading” claims during his first term, according to calculations published in 2021 by the Washington Post. That’s roughly 21 fibs a day. Second time around, he’s still hard at it, lying to Americans and the world on a daily basis. Trump’s disregard for truth and honesty in public life – seen again in his despicable response to the fatal shooting in Minneapolis – is dangerously immoral.

Trump declared last week that the only constraint on his power is “my own morality, my own mind”. That explains a lot. His idea of right and wrong is wholly subjective. He is his own ethical and legal adviser, his own priest and confessor. He is a church of one. Trump lies to himself as well as everyone else. And the resulting damage is pernicious. It costs lives, harms democracy and destroys trust between nations...

Disrespect for international law, the flouting of sovereign rights and territorial independence, and the ongoing replacement of the UN-backed rules-based order with neo-imperial spheres of influence are evident in all three crises. So, too, is a failure to defend the democratic rights of ordinary people. The US has presumptuously, illegally ruled out elections in Venezuela. Russia is trying to kill Ukraine’s democracy. Greenlanders say they alone must decide their future. But who’s listening to them?

Many of these broader trends were already well established. Yet Trump’s destabilising, unprincipled, lawless, chaotic and fundamentally immoral carrying-on in 2025 has undoubtedly acted as catalyst and accelerant. Of all these ills, his moral turpitude is the greatest. It corrupts, bedevils, darkens and poisons the humanity of the world. It is toxic to all it touches. Trumpism is a corrosive disease. Its latest victims are in Minneapolis and Portland. In truth, they are everywhere.

To mangle Mark Twain: “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and Donald Trump.” Americans and their too-diffident friends in Britain and Europe must be more forceful in speaking truth to power – before, like the much-reviled George III, Trump does something really crazy."

‘He was struggling with his breath. I sat beside him and sang’: the choir who sing to people on their deathbeds; The Guardian, December 12, 2025

Fiona Sturges , The Guardian; ‘He was struggling with his breath. I sat beside him and sang’: the choir who sing to people on their deathbeds

"It’s a brisk November afternoon in the village of South Brent in Devon and, in a daffodil yellow cottage, two women are singing me lullabies. But these aren’t the sort of lullabies that parents sing to their children. They are songs written and sung for terminally ill people, to ease them towards what will hopefully be a peaceful and painless death.

We are at the home of Nickie Aven, singer and leader of a Threshold Choir. Aven and her friend are giving me a glimpse of what happens when they sing for people receiving end-of-life care. These patients are usually in hospices or in their own homes being supported by relatives, which is why 67-year-old Aven – who is softly spoken and radiates warmth and kindness – has asked me to lie down on the sofa under a rug while they sing. She says I can look at them, or I can close my eyes and allow my mind to drift. In fact, my eyes settle on Lennon, Aven’s large black labrador retriever who squeezes himself between the singers and is as gentle and well-mannered as his owner. The pair sing a cappella and in harmony. Distinct from elegies or laments, the songs are gently meditative, written to provide human connection and foster feelings of love and safety. They are not just for the benefit of the dying but for friends and relatives caring for them or holding vigil. Their singing is simple, intimate and beautiful. It is also utterly calming."

Give newborns automatic library cards, authors urge; BBC, December 15, 2025

Kerena Cobbina, BBC; Give newborns automatic library cards, authors urge

"A group of leading authors are calling for every newborn baby to be signed up for a library card automatically at birth. 

Writers including Sir Philip Pullman, Richard Osman and Kate Mosse have backed the proposal by think tank the Cultural Policy Unit (CPU), which says a universal, lifelong membership issued at birth would boost literacy.

"A lot of people still feel that [libraries are] not for them," Mosse told BBC Radio 4's Today programme, but said automatically giving out cards could show that "every single young child that's born is welcome".

The CPU proposal would see membership linked directly to birth registration, so library cards would be waiting for newborns at their local library."

Government's AI consultation finds just 3% support copyright exception; The Bookseller, December 15, 2025

 MAIA SNOW, The Bookseller; Government's AI consultation finds just 3% support copyright exception

"The initial results of the consultation found that the majority of respondents (88%) backed licences being required in all cases where data was being used for AI training. Just 3% of respondents supported the government’s preferred options, which would allow data mining by AI companies and require rights holders to opt-out."

I called my recipe book Sabzi – vegetables. But the name was trademarked. And my legal ordeal began; The Guardian, December 4, 2025

 Yasmin Khan, The Guardian ; I called my recipe book Sabzi – vegetables. But the name was trademarked. And my legal ordeal began

"Vegetables, in my experience, rarely cause controversy. Yet last month I found myself in the middle of a legal storm over who gets to own the word sabzi – the Hindi, Urdu, Punjabi, Persian, Dari and Pashto word for cooked veg or fresh greens. It was a story as absurd as it was stressful, a chain of delis threatened me with legal action over the title of a book I had spent years creating. But what began as a personal legal headache soon morphed into something bigger, a story about how power and privilege still dominate conversations about cultural ownership in the UK.

When the email first landed in my inbox, I assumed it must be a wind-up. My editor at Bloomsbury had forwarded a solicitor’s letter addressed to me personally, care of my publishers. As I read it, my stomach dropped. A deli owner from Cornwall accused me of infringing her intellectual property over my cookbook Sabzi: Fresh Vegetarian Recipes for Every Day. Why? Because in 2022, she had trademarked the word sabzi to use for her business and any future products, including a cookbook she hoped to write one day.

My jaw clenched as I pored over pages of legal documentation, written in the punitive and aggressive tone of a firm gearing up for a fight. I was accused of “misrepresentation” (copying the deli’s brand), damaging its business and affecting its future growth, and they demanded detailed commercial reports about my work, including sales revenue, stock numbers and distribution contracts – information so intrusive that it felt like an audit. Buried in the legal jargon was a line that shook me. They reserved the right to seek the “destruction” of all items relating to their infringement claim. Reading the threat of my book being pulped was nothing short of devastating. It was also utterly enraging.

Because sabzi isn’t some cute exotic brand name, it’s part of the daily lexicon of more than a billion people across cultures and borders. In south Asia, it simply means cooked vegetables."

Two AI copyright cases, two very different outcomes – here’s why; The Conversation, December 1, 2025

 Hayleigh Bosher, Reader in Intellectual Property Law, Brunel University of London , The Conversation; Two AI copyright cases, two very different outcomes – here’s why

"Artificial intelligence companies and the creative industries are locked in an ongoing battle, being played out in the courts. The thread that pulls all these lawsuits together is copyright.

There are now over 60 ongoing lawsuits in the US where creators and rightsholders are suing AI companies. Meanwhile, we have recently seen decisions in the first court cases from the UK and Germany – here’s what happened in those...

Although the circumstances of the cases are slightly different, the heart of the issue was the same. Do AI models reproduce copyright-protected content in their training process and in generating outputs? The German court decided they do, whereas the UK court took a different view.

Both cases could be appealed and others are underway, so things may change. But the ending we want to see is one where AI and the creative industries come together in agreement. This would preferably happen with the use of copyright licences that benefit them both.

Importantly, it would also come with the consent of – and fair payment to – creators of the content that makes both their industries go round."

Aid cuts have shaken HIV/Aids care to its core – and will mean millions more infections ahead; The Guardian, December 1, 2025

Kat Lay , The Guardian; Aid cuts have shaken HIV/Aids care to its core – and will mean millions more infections ahead

"Stories of the devastating impact of US, British and wider European aid cuts on the fight against HIV – particularly in sub-Saharan Africa – continue to mount as 2025 comes to an end, and are set out in a series of reports released in the past week.

The Trump administration abruptly cut all overseas aid spending in January, with only piecemeal restorations to funding since then. Other countries, including the UK, have announced their own cuts. It has been estimated that external health assistance over 2025 will be between 30% and 40% lower than it was in 2023."

Minister indicates sympathy for artists in debate over AI and copyright; The Guardian, November 23, 2025

Robert Booth, The Guardian; Minister indicates sympathy for artists in debate over AI and copyright

 "The technology secretary, Liz Kendall, has indicated she is sympathetic to artists’ demands not to have their copyrighted works scraped by AI companies without payment and said she wanted to “reset” the debate.

In remarks that suggest a change in approach from her predecessor, Peter Kyle, who had hoped to require artists to actively opt out of having their work ingested by generative AI systems, she said “people rightly want to get paid for the work that they do” and “we have to find a way that both sectors can grow and thrive in future”.

The government has been consulting on a new intellectual property framework for AI which, in the case of the most common large language models (LLMs), requires vast amounts of training data to work effectively.

The issue has sparked impassioned protests from some of Britain’s most famous artists. This month Paul McCartney released a silent two-minute 45 second track of an empty studio on an album protesting against copyright grabs by AI firms as part of a campaign also backed by Kate Bush, Sam Fender, the Pet Shop Boys and Hans Zimmer."

Paul McCartney joins music industry protest against AI with silent track; The Guardian, November 17, 2025

Robert Booth, The Guardian ; Paul McCartney joins music industry protest against AI with silent track

"At two minutes 45 seconds it’s about the same length as With a Little Help From My Friends. But Paul McCartney’s first new recording in five years lacks the sing-along tune and jaunty guitar chops because there’s barely anything there.

The former Beatle, arguably Britain’s greatest living songwriter, is releasing a track of an almost completely silent recording studio as part of a music industry protest against copyright theft by artificial intelligence companies.

In place of catchy melodies and evocative lyrics there is only quiet hiss and the odd clatter. It suggests that if AI companies unfairly exploit musicians’ intellectual property to train their generative AI models, the creative ecosystem will be wrecked and original music silenced.

McCartney, 83 and currently touring North America, has added the track to the B-side of an LP called Is This What We Want?, which is filled with other silent recordings and will be pressed on vinyl and released later this month."

Getty Images v. Stability AI- Intellectual Property Rights in the Age of Generative AI; The National Law Journal, November 14, 2025

 Nathan Smith, Anita Hodea Katten   , The National Law Journal; Getty Images v. Stability AI- Intellectual Property Rights in the Age of Generative AI

"Key Takeaways

• Getty succeeded only in part, and narrowly, on its trade mark infringement claims. Findings were confined to specific examples of outputs from early versions of the Model involving "iStock" and "Getty Images" watermarks.
• Getty's secondary copyright infringement claim failed. The court held that the Model’s weights were not an "infringing copy" of Getty's works because the Model did not at any time contain or store a copy of the underlying Getty images.
• The judgment leaves critical questions unanswered relating to the relationship between IP rights and generative AI, particularly whether the use of copyright protected works to train AI models constitutes copyright infringement. It was hoped that these issues would be addressed by the court, but this element of the claim was withdrawn during trial.
• Looking ahead, the UK government's ongoing work with expert groups from both the creative and technology sectors will be closely watched, as it seeks to balance the protection of human creativity with technological innovation."