Category: Uncategorized

Teenage darts sensation Luke Littler has applied to trademark his own face in a landmark move aimed at protecting his image from AI-generated fakes and unauthorised commercial use.
The 19-year-old, already a two-time World Darts Championship winner, has submitted an application to the UK Intellectual Property Office as concerns grow over the rapid rise of deepfakes and AI-generated content exploiting public figures.
Littler’s likeness is already widely used across commercial products, from branded dartboards and video games to food items, reflecting his meteoric rise as one of the most marketable names in British sport. He has previously secured trademark protection for his nickname “The Nuke” in the United States, underlining the increasing value of his personal brand.
The latest move signals a growing trend among high-profile athletes and celebrities seeking to protect their identity in an era where AI tools can replicate faces and voices with alarming accuracy.
Graeme Murray, a trademark attorney at Marks & Clerk, said such applications are becoming more common as public figures attempt to safeguard their image. He noted that AI-generated content poses a “genuine threat” to the commercial value and goodwill associated with well-known individuals.
“The objective is to create exclusivity around a recognisable appearance that consumers associate with one individual,” he explained. “This prevents third parties from exploiting that identity without consent, particularly in commercial settings.”
The legal landscape, however, remains uncertain. Unlike some jurisdictions, the UK does not recognise a formal “right of personality”, meaning individuals have limited protection over the commercial use of their likeness outside existing intellectual property frameworks.
Iain Connor, intellectual property partner at Michelmores, warned that trademarking a face is not a comprehensive solution. “Even if successful, trade mark protection is limited to specific categories of goods and services,” he said. “It is not a silver bullet against deepfakes.”
He added that previous attempts to protect identity through trademarks have produced mixed results, citing successful and unsuccessful cases involving public figures. The challenge lies in proving that a face or likeness functions as a distinctive commercial identifier.
The move comes as policymakers and legal experts increasingly debate how to regulate AI-generated content. The UK government has already acknowledged potential gaps in existing copyright and IP frameworks, with discussions underway about introducing new “personality rights” to better protect individuals from digital replication.
Littler’s application therefore represents not only a commercial strategy but also a test case for how far current intellectual property law can stretch in the age of generative AI.
Away from the courtroom, Littler continues to dominate on the oche. Fresh from a dramatic comeback victory over Gerwyn Price in Dublin, he admitted he is still adapting to the pressures of fame and fan scrutiny.
But as his profile continues to grow, so too does the need to protect it, not just from rivals on the darts circuit, but from the increasingly sophisticated capabilities of artificial intelligence.
Read more:
Luke Littler moves to trademark his face in bid to combat AI fakes

Turo is stepping up its push into London, targeting former Zipcar users with a capital-light car-sharing model that avoids the high costs associated with owning and maintaining a fleet.
The US-based peer-to-peer platform, which has operated in the UK since 2018, allows private car owners to rent out their vehicles directly to users. More than 2,000 London motorists are already listing cars on the platform, according to the company, as it seeks to capitalise on a gap left by Zipcar’s withdrawal from the capital at the end of 2025.
Unlike traditional car clubs, Turo does not own or lease vehicles. Instead, it acts as a marketplace, enabling short-term rentals between individuals. The approach significantly reduces capital expenditure and operational overheads, a key differentiator at a time when rising costs have squeezed fleet-based operators.
Rory Brimmer, Turo’s UK managing director, said the model unlocks value from underutilised assets. “Cars are idle most of the time,” he noted, describing them as assets that can generate income rather than sit unused.
Hosts set their own availability and pricing, with rates fluctuating based on demand and seasonality. Turo takes a commission of between 25% and 35%, depending on the level of insurance and services selected. The company says the average London host earns around £400 per month, although more active users can generate significantly higher returns.
Brimmer himself rents out his Audi Q3 for roughly half the month, earning close to £800, and said built-in safeguards such as insurance cover and DVLA-integrated licence checks are critical to building trust on the platform.
The company has moved quickly to capture displaced demand following Zipcar’s exit, launching a £120,000 advertising campaign across the London Underground and Overground networks. Brimmer described the market shift as a clear “opportunity” to attract users previously reliant on traditional car clubs.
Zipcar’s departure reflects the mounting pressure on fleet-heavy models. The company cited deteriorating financial performance, falling usage and rising costs, including energy, insurance and vehicle maintenance, as key factors behind its decision. Additional pressures, such as the extension of London’s congestion charge to electric vehicles, have further eroded margins.
The contrasting fortunes of the two models highlight a broader shift in the economics of shared mobility. While asset-heavy operators face rising fixed costs and utilisation challenges, marketplace-driven platforms like Turo benefit from scalability without balance sheet exposure.
Policy momentum in London continues to favour shared transport solutions. With lower car ownership rates than the national average, city authorities, led by Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan, are seeking to reduce private vehicle use and encourage alternatives such as car clubs and shared mobility schemes.
Turo’s UK expansion also comes as it recalibrates its global strategy. The company has recently shelved plans for a New York Stock Exchange listing, with chief executive Andre Haddad citing market conditions and a desire to remain private to continue investing in growth.
Despite that decision, the business has scaled rapidly. Revenues rose from $150 million in 2020 to $958 million in 2024, with 150,000 active hosts and 3.5 million users worldwide.
For the UK market, the divergence between capital-light platforms and traditional fleet operators is becoming increasingly pronounced, and as funding tightens and cost pressures persist, that distinction may define the next phase of urban mobility.
Read more:
Truro targets former Zipcar users with capital-light expansion in London

Labour has unveiled plans to allow wind turbines up to 30 metres tall to be installed at schools, hospitals and farms without full planning permission, in a significant shift aimed at accelerating the rollout of small-scale renewable energy across the UK.
Under the proposed changes, ministers will extend permitted development rights, currently limited largely to domestic properties, to cover non-domestic sites including public sector buildings and commercial premises. The move is designed to enable organisations to generate their own electricity and reduce exposure to volatile energy costs.
At present, homeowners can install small turbines without planning approval, but these are capped at 15 metres when mounted on a building and 11.1 metres when placed in a garden. The new framework would more than double that height limit for non-domestic use, allowing turbines comparable in scale to mature trees to be deployed more widely.
A turbine of this size can generate up to 50 kilowatts of power, which the government says is sufficient to meet the full electricity demand of a medium-sized farm or significantly offset consumption at sites such as schools and hospitals.
Energy minister Michael Shanks said the reforms would give organisations “the tools to lower their bills and make the best use of their land”, describing onshore wind as one of the cheapest and quickest forms of energy to deploy.
The policy comes against a backdrop of heightened energy price volatility driven by global geopolitical tensions, with ministers increasingly focused on boosting domestic generation to improve long-term resilience.
However, the proposals have already drawn criticism from opposition politicians and rural campaign groups, who warn the changes could sideline local communities.
Richard Tice, Reform UK’s deputy leader and energy spokesman, described the move as “intrusive”, accusing the government of weakening planning protections in pursuit of its net zero agenda.
Similarly, Sarah Lee of the Countryside Alliance cautioned that the reforms risk setting a precedent for wider development without adequate consultation. She said the key issue was not the turbines themselves, but “location, density and consent”, adding that planning rules exist to ensure local voices are heard.
Despite the relaxation of rules, planning permission will still be required for installations in sensitive areas, including conservation zones, listed buildings and designated habitats.
Industry figures have broadly welcomed the shift, arguing it could help address one of the UK’s core energy challenges, its reliance on imported gas. Nigel Pocklington of renewable supplier Good Energy said scaling domestic renewables is “the most effective way to bring prices down over the long term”.
The reforms also attempt to address the slow uptake of small-scale wind technology in the UK. Despite permitted development rights for homes being in place since 2011, adoption has remained limited, with just 128 installations recorded over the past decade.
That lack of traction has been attributed to a combination of planning constraints, cost barriers and public resistance, challenges the government now hopes to overcome by targeting larger, non-domestic sites where energy demand is higher and installations can deliver more meaningful savings.
For businesses and public sector organisations facing rising energy costs, the policy signals a shift towards decentralised, site-level generation, but its success will likely depend on how effectively ministers balance speed of deployment with local acceptance.
Read more:
Labour to allow 30m wind turbines at schools and hospitals in planning shake-up

HSBC is weighing up plans to cut as many as 20,000 jobs globally over the next three to five years as it accelerates the use of artificial intelligence to streamline operations, in what could become one of the most significant workforce reductions in modern banking.
According to reports, the lender is exploring how AI can reduce reliance on back- and middle-office roles, with up to 10 per cent of its 210,000-strong global workforce potentially affected. While the bank declined to comment, the proposals align with a broader strategic push under chief executive Georges Elhedery to simplify processes and reduce operational complexity.
In the UK, where HSBC employs around 34,700 people, a proportional reduction could see approximately 3,500 roles impacted. The bank’s domestic footprint spans retail banking, corporate operations and asset management, alongside its London headquarters.
The potential cuts form part of a wider transformation agenda as HSBC seeks to embed generative AI across the organisation. Speaking earlier this year, Elhedery said the bank was rolling out AI tools to all employees, aiming to both improve productivity and enhance customer-facing services through more personalised interactions.
“We want to simplify processes, procedures and policies and reduce complexity,” he said at the time, while also highlighting the role of AI in equipping frontline staff.
The review of headcount began before the recent escalation in the Middle East, underscoring that the move is driven by long-term structural change rather than short-term economic shocks. Since taking over in 2024, Elhedery has already reduced staffing through divestments and a sharper focus on HSBC’s core markets, particularly in Greater China.
A reduction on this scale would place HSBC at the forefront of an emerging trend across global finance, where automation is increasingly targeting traditional white-collar roles. Industry estimates suggest banks could eliminate up to 200,000 positions worldwide in the coming years as AI systems take over tasks such as compliance checks, document processing and client onboarding.
Recent announcements from other sectors reinforce the direction of travel. Amazon has outlined plans to cut 16,000 roles, while Hewlett-Packard expects to shed up to 6,000 jobs over three years, both citing efficiency gains from AI. In the UK, Close Brothers this week confirmed 600 job cuts as it deploys AI “at pace” to reduce costs.
For HSBC, the financial incentives are significant. The bank reported a wage bill of $19.6 billion last year, up 6 per cent, and is targeting $1.5 billion in annualised cost savings ahead of schedule. AI-driven efficiencies are expected to play a central role in achieving those targets.
Pam Kaur, HSBC’s chief financial officer, recently emphasised the dual benefit of AI adoption, highlighting both revenue opportunities and cost reductions. “We are focused on the benefits we can get through AI, whether it’s on better productivity around the revenue line or just the cost benefit,” she said.
The shift also reflects a broader evolution in workforce strategy, with HSBC increasingly adopting a performance-led model in which top performers receive a larger share of bonuses, while underperformers are encouraged to exit.
However, the scale of potential job losses raises questions about the pace at which AI can deliver tangible financial returns. A widely cited study last year found that the vast majority of corporate AI initiatives had yet to materially improve profitability, suggesting that expectations may still be running ahead of reality.
Even so, sentiment among large corporates appears to have shifted. Businesses are now more willing to act on anticipated gains from automation, betting that AI can meaningfully reshape cost structures without undermining service quality.
For HSBC, the outcome of its deliberations will be closely watched across the financial sector. If implemented, the cuts would not only mark a major restructuring for one of the world’s largest banks, but also signal a tipping point in how AI is transforming employment across global finance.
Read more:
HSBC could cut 20,000 jobs as AI reshapes global banking workforce

Legal technology company Harvey has signed Suits actor Gabriel Macht as a brand ambassador in an unusual move for the B2B sector, as competition intensifies in the fast-growing legal AI market.
Macht, best known for playing high-powered corporate lawyer Harvey Specter in the hit TV series, will partner with the company whose name was directly inspired by his on-screen character. The role marks a rare crossover between entertainment and enterprise software, where celebrity endorsements remain relatively uncommon.
While consumer technology brands have long leveraged star power, from Apple’s collaborations with musicians to Logitech’s campaigns featuring Hollywood actors, such partnerships are far less typical in enterprise-focused industries such as legal technology. However, the move signals a shift as AI firms seek broader brand recognition in an increasingly crowded market.
Macht said his decision to work with Harvey was rooted in the company’s trajectory and its approach to responsible AI deployment.
“I’m partnering with Harvey because I care about where this company goes,” he said. “I want to support a responsible approach that keeps public interest in view. Harvey’s momentum over the last three-plus years has made it a leading legal AI platform, helping teams change the way they work with AI, faster and with more clarity.”
Founded to bring generative AI into legal workflows, Harvey has rapidly gained traction among law firms and corporate legal departments looking to automate research, contract analysis and document drafting. Its growth reflects a broader shift across the legal profession, where firms are under pressure to improve efficiency while maintaining accuracy and compliance.
The partnership also coincides with the launch of Harvey’s new Instagram presence, @askharvey, as the company looks to build a more visible and accessible brand identity beyond traditional enterprise sales channels.
The partnership also coincides with the launch of Harvey’s new Instagram presence, @askharvey
Winston Weinberg, co-founder and chief executive of Harvey, said Macht’s association with the legal profession made him a natural fit for the company’s next phase of growth.
“Gabriel’s legendary performance as a lawyer continues to inspire people to pursue law,” he said. “There’s no better spokesperson to support Harvey’s global brand growth and the launch of our Instagram account.”
The announcement follows a growing trend of brand-building across the legal AI sector. Earlier this month, rival platform Legora entered into a sponsorship agreement with Swedish golfer Ludvig Åberg, placing its branding in a sporting context more typically associated with consumer-facing companies.
Such moves highlight how even highly specialised software firms are increasingly adopting marketing strategies borrowed from consumer industries, as they compete not just on product capability but on visibility, trust and cultural relevance.
For Harvey, the alignment with a character synonymous with confidence, precision and legal excellence is likely to resonate with a profession navigating rapid technological change. Whether that translates into tangible commercial advantage remains to be seen, but the signal is clear: legal tech is no longer content to operate quietly in the background.
As artificial intelligence continues to redefine how legal work is delivered, firms like Harvey are not only racing to build the most capable platforms, but also the most recognisable brands.
Read more:
Legal AI firm Harvey signs Suits star Gabriel Macht in rare B2B brand deal

Neurodiverse workers could hold a distinct advantage as artificial intelligence reshapes the modern workplace, according to a UK technology entrepreneur who says businesses are overlooking a critical talent pool at a pivotal moment of change.
Josh Hough, founder of home care software firm CareLineLive, has argued that traits commonly associated with neurodiversity, including heightened focus, pattern recognition and unconventional problem-solving, are becoming increasingly valuable as organisations accelerate their adoption of AI-driven systems and workflows.
Speaking during Neurodiversity Celebration Week, Hough said many employers remain too focused on traditional hiring frameworks, despite the growing need for adaptability and innovative thinking.
“A lot of businesses still want people who tick every box,” he said. “The reality is, people who think differently often solve problems differently.
“In a world where everything is changing quickly, that’s a real advantage. You need people who don’t just follow a process, but can see a better way of doing things.”
His comments come as businesses across the UK and globally invest heavily in artificial intelligence to drive productivity, automate processes and unlock new growth opportunities. However, this shift is also redefining the types of skills and mindsets organisations require, placing a premium on cognitive diversity rather than uniformity.
Hough’s own approach to leadership and hiring has been shaped by personal experience. Born with a rare muscle-weakening condition that left him reliant on a wheelchair for much of his early life, he developed a mindset centred on adaptability and alternative problem-solving from a young age.
“When you grow up having to do things differently you don’t assume the standard way is the best way,” he said. “That carries through into business.”
Founded in 2014, CareLineLive has grown into a significant player in the digital care technology space, supporting more than 700 home care providers across multiple countries and used by over 25,000 carers. Its platform is designed to streamline operations across the care sector, from staff management and patient records to real-time communication between care providers, families and healthcare professionals.
At a time when the care sector is under sustained pressure from staffing shortages, rising demand and regulatory complexity, Hough believes technology, combined with diverse thinking, is essential to improving efficiency and outcomes.
“One of the biggest challenges in care is how information flows between people and services,” he said. “Too often, information doesn’t move between people in the way it should. That creates risk and wastes time.
“Our focus has always been on making sure the right people have the right information at the right time.”
Beyond operational efficiency, Hough’s comments highlight a broader shift in how businesses should think about talent in the AI era. As automation takes over routine and process-driven tasks, the ability to think laterally, identify patterns and approach problems from new angles is becoming more strategically important.
This has significant implications for recruitment, workplace culture and long-term competitiveness. Companies that continue to prioritise rigid skill checklists and conventional career paths risk missing out on individuals who may be better suited to navigating complexity and change.
Hough said the conversation around neurodiversity must evolve beyond compliance or risk management and instead focus on value creation.
“Not everyone is going to fit a traditional mould,” he said. “But that doesn’t mean they can’t be excellent at what they do.
“If anything, in the current environment, thinking differently is exactly what businesses need.”
As AI adoption accelerates and the nature of work continues to shift, his message is clear: the future workforce will not just be defined by technical capability, but by diversity of thought, and those who recognise this early may gain a decisive edge.
Read more:
Neurodiverse talent could be key advantage in AI economy, says UK tech founder

Rolls-Royce Motor Cars has abandoned its ambition to become a fully electric brand by 2030, marking a significant shift in strategy as the global transition to electric vehicles shows signs of slowing at the very top end of the automotive market.
The decision, confirmed by chief executive Chris Brownridge, reverses a high-profile commitment made in 2022 under his predecessor Torsten Müller-Ötvös, who had pledged that Rolls-Royce would cease production of its iconic V12 combustion engines by the end of the decade.
At the time, the company positioned its first electric model, the Spectre, as the beginning of a rapid transition, targeting 20 per cent of annual sales in the near term and as much as 70 per cent by 2028. The long-term ambition was clear: a complete shift away from internal combustion engines within eight years.
However, Brownridge has now acknowledged that the assumptions underpinning that strategy have changed materially. He pointed to a combination of softened customer appetite for fully electric luxury vehicles and a broader easing of regulatory pressure in key markets.
“For every client that loves an electric vehicle there is one who does not,” he said, underlining the continued demand among Rolls-Royce’s ultra-high-net-worth clientele for traditional powertrains. “Some clients do want an electric vehicle, we build what is ordered.”
The recalibration reflects a wider industry trend, particularly among premium and luxury manufacturers, where the pace of electrification is proving more uneven than previously anticipated. While mass-market brands continue to push towards electrification, high-end marques are increasingly adopting a more flexible, demand-led approach.
Brownridge was careful not to outline a revised electrification timeline, declining to specify new targets for zero-emission sales or confirm how many additional electric models Rolls-Royce plans to introduce. Nor did he disclose current sales performance for the Spectre, though its market reception has been closely watched as a bellwether for electric adoption in the luxury segment.
Instead, the emphasis appears to be shifting towards optionality rather than outright transition. The V12 engine, long synonymous with Rolls-Royce’s heritage and brand identity, will remain part of the company’s offering for the foreseeable future.
“The V12 is part of our history,” Brownridge said, suggesting that legacy and customer preference are now being given equal weight alongside environmental considerations.
The move comes amid a broader reassessment of electric vehicle strategies across the luxury automotive sector. Just a day earlier, Bentley confirmed that its own transition to an all-electric lineup would be delayed, with its first zero-emission model now expected at least two years later than originally planned.
Together, the announcements highlight a growing divergence between policy ambition and market reality. While governments continue to push for decarbonisation, including through bans on new petrol and diesel vehicles in the 2030s, manufacturers are increasingly signalling that consumer demand, particularly at the premium end, may not align neatly with those timelines.
Rolls-Royce’s original 2030 commitment was made at a time of strong political momentum behind electrification and rising optimism about battery technology, infrastructure rollout and customer adoption. Since then, a more complex picture has emerged, with concerns around charging infrastructure, range anxiety and the experiential differences between electric and combustion engines influencing buyer behaviour.
In the ultra-luxury segment, where emotional connection and heritage play a significant role in purchasing decisions, those factors appear to be even more pronounced.
Despite stepping back from a fixed deadline, Rolls-Royce is not abandoning electrification altogether. The Spectre remains a central part of its future portfolio, and the company is expected to continue investing in electric technology. However, the transition will now be paced according to customer demand rather than dictated by a hard deadline.
The shift underscores a broader reality facing the automotive industry: the road to electrification is unlikely to be linear. For Rolls-Royce, the strategy now appears to be one of balance, preserving its legacy while adapting to a changing, but still uncertain, future.
Read more:
Rolls-Royce scraps 2030 all-electric target as demand softens

The UK government has stepped back from one of its most controversial proposals on artificial intelligence and copyright, signalling a decisive shift towards market-led licensing and greater transparency rather than sweeping legal reform.
In its long-awaited Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, published in March 2026, ministers confirm they will no longer pursue a broad copyright exception for AI training with an opt-out mechanism — a policy that had triggered fierce opposition from across the UK’s creative industries.
Instead, the government is opting for a more cautious, evidence-led approach, prioritising transparency obligations and allowing a nascent but rapidly expanding licensing market to develop. The move marks a significant recalibration of policy at a time when the UK is seeking to position itself as both an AI superpower and a global creative hub.
At the heart of the report is a clear admission: the government’s preferred option, allowing AI developers to use copyrighted material unless rightsholders explicitly opted out, failed to win support.
The consultation attracted more than 11,500 responses, with the overwhelming majority of creators, publishers and rights organisations rejecting the proposal outright.
Ministers now concede that a broad exception “with opt-out is no longer the government’s preferred way forward”, citing strong industry opposition, lack of consensus, and insufficient evidence on economic impact.
This represents a notable victory for the UK’s creative sectors, from publishing and music to film and photography, which argued that such an exception would effectively legalise uncompensated use of their work by generative AI systems.
The report lays bare the fundamental policy dilemma: how to balance AI-driven economic growth with the protection of intellectual property.
On one side sit AI developers, who require vast datasets, often including copyrighted material, to train large language models and generative systems. On the other are creators whose works underpin those systems but risk being displaced by them.
The government acknowledges that modern AI models are typically trained on “billions of copyright works”, raising complex questions about fairness, consent and competition.
Yet it also highlights uncertainty around the economic benefits of reform, noting limited evidence that loosening copyright rules would materially increase AI investment in the UK.
In effect, ministers are choosing to pause rather than gamble.
Rather than legislating, the government is placing its bets on licensing, a market-based mechanism already beginning to take shape.
A growing number of deals between AI firms and content owners, particularly in publishing, music and image libraries, suggests a commercial model is emerging. However, the report acknowledges this market is still “new and evolving” and lacks transparency.
Crucially, ministers have ruled out direct intervention for now:
“We propose not to intervene in the licensing market at this stage… and will keep market-led approaches under review.”
This position aligns closely with industry sentiment across both creative and technology sectors, which broadly favour voluntary, negotiated agreements over statutory schemes.
However, it also raises important questions, particularly for SMEs and individual creators, about bargaining power and equitable remuneration.
Among those welcoming the shift is Tom West, CEO of Publishers’ Licensing Services (PLS), who sees licensing as both practical and scalable.
West said: “We welcome that the government has listened to the strong response it received from across the UK’s creative industries to its consultation and has stepped back from its preferred option of a copyright exception with an opt out and is to review the transparency of AI inputs, which would further boost licensing.
Whilst we await further clarity from the government on the long-term direction of its copyright policy, PLS will continue to serve our publishers and work with our partners on market-based, industry-backed AI licensing solutions.
This approach is already being put into practice. At the London Book Fair last week, PLS launched the first stage of a new collective licensing solution designed specifically to support the use of published content in AI. It was met with strong interest and positive feedback from publishers and industry partners, with publishers already beginning to sign up. The solution offers a practical, scalable way for AI developers to access high-quality content while ensuring creators are paid and retain control over how their work is used.
The case has not been made for the introduction of a new copyright exception. There is no market failure and a dynamic licensing market for the use of content in AI has developed and continues to grow. Any copyright exception for generative AI would jeopardise these licensing solutions, removing the ability of large and small rightsholders to receive payment for the use of their works in AI and reducing control over their content.
PLS welcomes the government’s engagement on this critical issue. We share a commitment to a mutually beneficial outcome and invite the government to work closely with us to help further develop and promote licensing options that support rightsholders of all sizes and AI developers seeking high-quality, trusted content.”
If licensing is the economic mechanism, transparency is the regulatory lever.
More than 90% of consultation respondents supported requirements for AI developers to disclose the sources of training data.
The government agrees, in principle, but stops short of immediate regulation. Instead, it proposes:
• developing industry-led best practice
• monitoring international frameworks (notably the EU AI Act)
• considering future legislation if needed
Transparency is seen as essential to enable enforcement, licensing and trust, particularly given that creators often have no visibility over whether their work has been used.
For UK businesses, particularly SMEs, the implications are nuanced.
For creators and publishers
• greater protection in the short term
• stronger negotiating position in licensing deals
• ongoing challenges around enforcement and visibility
For AI startups and developers
• continued legal uncertainty
• potential cost barriers to accessing training data
• reliance on licensed or overseas-trained models
For the wider economy
• slower regulatory clarity
• reduced risk of over-regulation
• continued dependence on global AI ecosystems
The report explicitly notes that SMEs on both sides, creators and developers, face disproportionate challenges under the current system.
Perhaps the most striking aspect of the report is its tone: cautious, iterative, and deliberately non-committal.
The government repeatedly emphasises the need for more evidence, more international alignment, and more market development before taking decisive legislative action.
With ongoing litigation in the US, new rules emerging in the EU, and rapid advances in generative AI, the UK risks being pulled in multiple directions, economically, legally and politically.
This is not a resolution, it is a holding position.
By stepping back from sweeping reform, the government has bought time. But it has also shifted responsibility onto the market to prove that licensing can work at scale, fairly and efficiently.
If it can, the UK may yet carve out a balanced model that supports both innovation and creativity.
If it cannot, the debate over copyright and AI will return, sharper, louder, and far harder to resolve.
Read more:
UK government backs away from AI copyright overhaul as licensing emerges as the battleground

The UK government is facing mounting political pressure to unlock £2.5 billion in proceeds from the sale of Chelsea Football Club, as opposition figures warn further delays risk undermining support for Ukraine.
The funds, frozen since 2022 following the forced sale of the club by sanctioned Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, remain tied up in a legal and diplomatic dispute over how the money should be distributed. Ministers have now indicated they are preparing to take legal action to resolve the impasse after a March deadline passed without agreement.
Shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride said the government “must not delay” in taking decisive steps to release the funds, arguing that the money should already have been deployed to support humanitarian efforts linked to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He warned that, more than two years after the sale, the continued freeze was becoming increasingly difficult to justify given the scale of need on the ground.
Abramovich was compelled to sell Chelsea in May 2022 after being sanctioned by the UK government in response to Vladimir Putin’s invasion. The club was acquired by a consortium led by US investor Todd Boehly in a deal worth £2.5 billion, with the proceeds placed into a UK bank account under strict government oversight.
At the time, Abramovich stated that the funds would be donated to support “all victims of the war in Ukraine”. However, the UK government has maintained that the full sum should be directed specifically towards Ukrainian humanitarian causes, creating a fundamental disagreement that has stalled progress.
Officials now appear to be losing patience. A government spokesperson confirmed that Abramovich had been given a final opportunity to resolve the matter voluntarily but had failed to do so, adding that further steps would now be taken to ensure the original commitments made during the sale are honoured.
The dispute has also been complicated by financial arrangements linked to Fordstam, the company through which Abramovich previously owned Chelsea. Filings suggest that less than £1 billion of the proceeds may ultimately be allocated to a charitable foundation after loan repayments, a position at odds with the government’s expectation that the entire sum should be used for humanitarian purposes.
The situation has become increasingly politically sensitive, particularly as the war in Ukraine continues and international support remains under scrutiny. Critics argue that the delay risks sending the wrong signal at a time when the UK has positioned itself as a leading supporter of Ukraine.
Stride’s intervention reflects broader concerns within Westminster that the issue has dragged on for too long. He pointed out that Labour has now been in power for 18 months without resolving the matter, despite repeated assurances that progress was being made.
The frozen funds represent one of the largest pools of Russian-linked assets held under UK sanctions, and the outcome of the case could set an important precedent for how such assets are treated in future. Legal experts suggest that any court action could hinge on the interpretation of sanctions law, charitable intent and the enforceability of commitments made during the sale process.
The controversy comes against the backdrop of continued scrutiny of Chelsea’s previous ownership. The club was recently fined £11 million and handed a suspended one-year transfer ban over undisclosed payments linked to the Abramovich era, although no players were found to have committed wrongdoing.
For now, the £2.5 billion remains frozen, symbolising both the complexity of sanctions enforcement and the challenges of converting political commitments into tangible outcomes. With ministers now signalling a willingness to escalate the matter through the courts, the next phase of the dispute is likely to be fought in the legal arena rather than through negotiation.
Read more:
Government urged to act as £2.5bn Chelsea sale funds remain frozen