We urge the UK Government to ensure the UK is a favourable place to develop
and use safe AI, by clarifying that public and legally accessed data is available for
AI training and analysis in its Code of Prac�ce.
We, the undersigned organisa�ons, welcome the Intellectual Property Oﬃce’s eﬀorts in taking
forward the AI recommenda�ons contained within the Vallance Report. While many othercountries have clariﬁed their intellectual property laws to support AI and innova�on, the UK has
yet to introduce a text and data mining excep�on to explicitly support knowledge transfer andcommercial AI. Given this, the Code of Prac�ce provides a par�cularly important opportunity toprovide clarity and ensure that the UK remains an atrac�ve place to undertake and invest inmachine learning.
As rights holders, researchers and innovators, we understand the importance of a wellfunc�oning IP system which strikes an appropriate balance between protec�ng intellectual
property rights and providing the necessary limits and excep�ons to those rights, in order toensure we have the right incen�ves to create, innovate and develop knowledge. Even without
an explicit commercial text and data mining excep�on, other excep�ons and legal doctrines willallow for text and data mining on copyrighted works.
Whilst ques�ons have arisen in the past which consider copyright implica�ons in rela�on to newtechnologies, this is the ﬁrst �me that such debate risks en�rely hal�ng the development of a
new technology.
AI relies on analysing large amounts of data. Large-scale machine learning, in par�cular, must be
trained on vast amounts of data in order to func�on correctly, safely and without bias. Safety iscri�cal, as highlighted in the Bletchley Declara�on. In order to achieve the necessary scale, AI
developers need to be able to use the data they have lawful access to, such as data that is madefreely available to view on the open web or to which they already have access to by agreement.
Any restric�on on the use of such data or dispropor�onate legal requirements will nega�vely
impact on the development of AI, not only inhibi�ng the development of large-scale AI in theUK but exacerba�ng further pre-exis�ng issues caused by unequal access to data.
It will create barriers to entry and raise costs for new entrants.
Unlike other countries, it also would mean that AI model developers would be unable totrain their models on publicly available data in the UK without an explicit licence from eachrightsholder. In addi�on to making the UK uncompe��ve in AI markets it will dispropor�onately
impact small to medium enterprises, knowledge transfer and hinder open source developmentof AI.
Importantly, text and data mining techniques are not only used to train AI. Text and data mining
techniques are necessary to analyse large volumes of content, o�en using AI, to detect paterns

and generate insights, without needing to manually read everything. Such analysis is regularly
needed across all areas of our society and economy, from healthcare to marke�ng, climate
research to ﬁnance.
We believe that in order to support and incen�vise researchers and innovators, the UK is best
served by a balanced copyright system that encourages the many exci�ng economic and social
opportuni�es that AI makes possible.
In order that the UK remains compe��ve in scien�ﬁc and technology markets, the government
should ensure that a Code of Prac�ce:·Clariﬁes that access to broad and varied data sets that are publicly available online remain
available for analysis, including text and data mining, without the need for licensing.
·Recognises that even without an explicit commercial text and data mining excep�on,excep�ons and limits on copyright law exist that would permit text and data mining forcommercial purposes.
·Recognises that the UK operates in an interna�onal environment where global norms tosupport AI are well developed. We observe that countries such as the US, Israel, South Korea,
Singapore and Japan have broad fair use doctrines or text and data mining excep�ons ofdiﬀering levels of ﬂexibility aimed at suppor�ng research and technological advancement. As
these countries have concluded, we believe that even small diﬀerences in clarity in IP regimes
can result in big eﬀects on the economy.
·Recognises the broad applica�on of AI across many other sectors of the economy; not least
health, the environment, bio-science, agriculture, transport, logis�cs etc. The Code of Prac�cemee�ngs have focused on the requests of the crea�ve industries. The report should reﬂect thisby focusing on the outputs of AI systems that are relevant to that sector.
·Supports the Prime Minister’s vision that the UK becomes a world leader on safe andresponsible AI. The ability to train AI models on broad and varied data sets that are publicly
available or legally accessed under agreement will enable the development of safe, ethical andunbiased AI. The code should emphasise the role of government in suppor�ng high-func�oning
AI by ensuring that all en��es are able to develop AI using the necessary scale of data.
·Avoids introducing fric�ons around using data necessary to develop safe AI. Any measuresthat discourage the use of broad and varied data sets will have a serious and nega�ve impact on
all sectors of the economy using AI. AI is predicated on the three Vs – velocity of processing
power as well as volume and veracity (data that is required to ensure the models are accurate).
Introducing fric�ons that hinder use of publicly available or legally accessed data for training
therefore prevents the necessary use of data of all types that is required to make sure themodels have high levels of predic�ve accuracy and avoid bias. We must support accurate AI andnot hinder it.

In terms of speciﬁc features of a Code of Prac�ce, the following should be included:·Explicit reference to the idea-expression dichotomy, exis�ng excep�ons, limita�ons andthe implied licence doctrine that allow the processing of data that a person or organisa�onalready has legal access to. We must not interfere with laws that support the very func�oning ofthe internet.
·Clariﬁes that access to broad and varied data sets that are publicly available online remain
available for analysis, including text and data mining, without the need for licensing.
·Clariﬁca�on that the code of conduct does not undermine the opera�vity of s29A (Copiesfor text and data analysis for non-commercial research.)·In order to promote the uptake of AI, support and encourage the crea�ve industry sector
to develop standardisa�on of data access agreements, data and schemas.
·The establishment of service level agreements with content providers to swi�ly address
instances where access to paid for and legally accessed data is erroneously suspended, contrary
to the terms of the agreement entered into. This is a par�cularly acute issue for scien�ﬁcresearchers in universi�es. The UK should follow interna�onal best prac�ce and require thataccess for data analysis and AI is reinstated within a maximum of 72 hours.
·Support collabora�on between AI developers and content creators to mi�gate the risk ofAI tools from being used to infringe intellectual property rights and promote disinforma�on.
IP Federa�on
European Alliance for Research Excellence
The Entrepreneurs Network
Knowledge Rights 21Crea�ve CommonsWikimedia UK
Research Libraries UK
Libraries and Archives Copyright Alliance
OpenUK
BSA | The So�ware Alliance10th November 2023