UK government tries to placate opponents of AI copyright bill

Q: How long will it take to read this news story?

The story "UK government tries to placate opponents of AI copyright bill" has 1184 words across 20 sentences, which will take approximately 5 - 10 minutes for the average person to read.

Q: Which news outlet covered this story?

The story "UK government tries to placate opponents of AI copyright bill" was covered 1 days ago by The Guardian, a news publisher based in United Kingdom.

Q: How trustworthy is 'The Guardian' news outlet?

The Guardian is a fully independent (privately-owned) news outlet established in 1821 that covers mostly artificial-intelligence and technology news. The outlet is headquartered in United Kingdom and publishes an average of 4 news stories per day. It's most recent story was published 11 hours ago.

Q: What do people currently think of this news story?

The sentiment for this story is currently Negative, indicating that people regard this as "bad news".

Q: How do I report this news for inaccuracy?

You can report an inaccurate news publication to us via our contact page. Please also include the news #ID number and the URL to this story.<ul><li>News ID: #27546522</li><li>URL: https://chronographically.beamstart.com/news/uk-government-tries-to-placate-17436177655064</li></ul>

The Guardian 1d ago

UK government tries to placate opponents of AI copyright bill - The Guardian

Quick Summary:

Economic impact assessment is one concession aiming to head off opposition from MPs, peers and creatives such as Paul McCartney and Tom StoppardThe UK government is trying to placate peer and Labour backbencher concerns about copyright proposals by pledging to assess the economic impact of its plans.

Creative professionals including Sir Paul McCartney, Sir Tom Stoppard and Kate Bush have strongly criticised ministers’ proposals to let artificial intelligence companies train their models on copyright-protected work without permission, unless the rights holder opts out.Continue reading...

Their stance has been supported by peers, who have passed amendments pushing back on the proposals, and by some backbench MPs.