UK passes updated data bill, without AI copyright provisions

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
After intensive debates, the United Kingdom parliament has finally passed the 'Data (Use and Access) Bill' (DUA Act), intended to simplify the use of and access to personal data for U.K. data regulators whilst easing the administrative burden of using personal data.
The DUA Act builds on the Data Protection Act 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—the landmark European Union regulation on information privacy and data use—to modernize the U.K.'s data regime and facilitate more streamlined compliance processes without eroding the protections of the GDPR legislation.
On June 11, the bill passed from the House of Lords to the Royal Assent stage—the final stage of the legislative process in the U.K., in which the King essentially rubber stamps bills that Parliament has approved.
When it does get its Royal approval—at a date to be decided soon—the DUA Act will become law and herald in the most significant change to the U.K.'s data protection framework since GDPR.
Key updates in the bill include expanding the scope for data processing under 'Legitimate Interests,' such as for direct marketing and security processing, reducing interruptive and ineffective cookie consent banners, and provisions to boost market research, product development, and technological innovation.
The structure and remit of the U.K.'s information rights regulator, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), will also be 'modernized,' requiring it to consider the public interest in promoting innovation and competition alongside privacy and data protection.
Another change involves streamlining the process of submitting a 'Data Subject Access Request' to make it more efficient for individuals and organizations to request information on how a company uses or stores its data.
However, one key change the bill doesn't include is a much-debated amendment to force big tech firms and artificial intelligence (AI) companies to get permission and/or pay for U.K. content, as the government insisted that it was planning to address this topic in future AI and copyright legislation—after the conclusion of a consultation on the topic in February.
The DPO Centre, a leading U.K. data protection officer and resource center, described the DUA Act as 'a targeted evolution of the current regime' rather than a complete departure from existing frameworks.
The rocky road to Royal Assent
The DUA Act's passage to Royal Assent was a long, bumpy road that started under the previous Conservative government with the Data Protection and Digital Access (DPDI) Bill, first introduced in 2022.
The DPDI set out a range of provisions for how data can be accessed, used, and processed, including making it easier and clearer for organizations to use and re-use data for research purposes; clarifying the processes and safeguards for the re-use of personal data; and easing compliance burdens on organizations related to record keeping, breach reporting and responding to unreasonable information requests from individuals. However, the DPDI failed to pass before the 2024 general election, and in October 2024, the new Labour government introduced the revised DUA Act.
The Labour bill retained much of the original content while removing some of the more controversial provisions of the DPDI, including one that would have allowed government oversight of the ICO's strategic priorities and another that required telecom providers to report suspected illegal marketing to the ICO.
On May 12, the House of Lords—the Upper chamber of U.K. Parliament—voted by a 147 majority to amend the DUA Act, adding transparency requirements to ensure U.K. copyright holders have to give permission for their work to be used.
The amendment would have forced tech companies to declare their use of copyright material when training AI tools so that they could not access U.K. content without paying for it—a proposal backed by prominent U.K. recording artists such as Elton John and Dua Lipa.
However, a couple of days later, the House of Common—the lower (and elected) chamber of Parliament primarily responsible for producing legislation—rejected this change, with the government reasoning that it was already carrying out a separate consultation on AI and copyright and wanted to wait on the outcome.
In an interview with BBC journalist Laura Kuenssberg, Elton John described the Commons' rejection of the amendment as 'criminal,' adding that if ministers went ahead with plans to allow AI firms to use artists' content without paying, they would be 'committing theft, thievery on a high scale.'
The Commons' decision also resulted in an extended back and forth, known as a 'ping-pong,' between the two houses of Parliament, as amendments were debated, changed, and rejected, with the legislation bouncing from one chamber to another in the process.
Ultimately, a compromise was struck, with the Commons rejecting the Lords' amendment on AI, but the government agreed to publish reports on its AI and copyright proposals within nine months of Royal Assent.
Ben Seretny, Head of DPOs at The DPO Centre, says, 'The final version of the DUA Bill feels more like a careful update than a radical overhaul of the UK GDPR and Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) frameworks.'
Commenting on June 12 on the bill's passage from Parliament, Seretny warned that 'while some areas are now clearer, others may introduce uncertainty.'
In particular, he noted that the DUA Act gives the Secretary of State more power to decide which countries have data protection standards that are not 'materially lower' than the U.K.—a shift in language that he suggested may concern the European Commission, which is due to review the U.K.'s data adequacy status in December.
In order for artificial intelligence (AI) to work right within the law and thrive in the face of growing challenges, it needs to integrate an enterprise blockchain system that ensures data input quality and ownership—allowing it to keep data safe while also guaranteeing the immutability of data. Check out CoinGeek's coverage on this emerging tech to learn more why Enterprise blockchain will be the backbone of AI .
Watch: Blockchain & AI unlock possibilities
title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen="">

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

an hour ago

• Daily Mail​

EXCLUSIVE Reform 'set to repeal assisted dying legislation in next general election' if it passes through Lords

Reform UK would pledge to repeal the legalisation of assisted dying at the next election, The Mail on Sunday understands. Nigel Farage 's party is expected to promise to reverse the law in its next manifesto, assuming the legislation passes in the Lords. On Friday MPs narrowly voted the Bill through by 23 votes – 32 fewer than when they backed it in principle in November. Under the current plans, assisted dying would not be available until 2029, giving opposition parties a window to reverse it, sources said. Mr Farage and two other Reform MPs voted against the private member's Bill on Friday. His deputy Richard Tice and newest MP Sarah Pochin voted for it. The Reform leader has said: 'I voted against the assisted dying Bill, not out of a lack of compassion, but because I fear that the law will widen in scope. If that happens, the right to die may become the obligation to die.' He also described the Bill as 'un-Christian in every way'. Campaigners against legalising assisted dying are hopeful the Bill will be prevented from becoming law in the House of Lords. A campaign source said: 'Bearing in mind how dangerous this Bill will be for vulnerable people, it's not unreasonable for different political parties to think about what might need to happen if it does become law. 'If the leadership of a party is of the view that the legal status quo is dangerous, it would only be natural for them to want to scrap the system.' It is also understood Reform would pledge to repeal the decriminalisation of abortion at any stage of pregnancy, voted through last week. An insider said: 'Each party will have to state its position on abortion and assisted dying in their manifestos. The election is an opportunity to reverse them both.' The change to abortion laws will mean women who terminate their pregnancy after 24 weeks will no longer be at risk of police investigation. The law would still penalise anyone who assists a woman in getting an abortion outside the 24-week legal framework. Mr Farage said after the vote: 'I am pro-choice, but I think it's ludicrous that we can allow abortion up to 24 weeks.

The Sun

2 hours ago

• The Sun

Assisted dying puts price on my head, says disabled peer Lord Kevin Shinkwin as he speaks out against the bill

A DISABLED peer said he fears he would not be alive today if assisted dying was already legal. Lord Kevin Shinkwin said the Terminally Ill Adults Bill 'puts a price on my head' and he would have felt pressure to agree to having a lethal injection over fear of being a burden. 1 The Tory's warning comes as campaigners vow to fight the assisted dying bill in the Lords after MPs narrowly backed it by just 23 votes on Friday. Lord Shinkwin, 54, is a disability rights campaigner who has a severe form of brittle bone disease. He said: 'I am a disabled person. I cost the NHS, over the course of my lifetime, probably several million pounds to keep me alive. 'This Bill would put a price on my head — on the head of so many disabled people.' Asked if he feared he would not be alive today if the assisted dying law was in force, Lord Shinkwin said: 'I think you have hit the nail on the head. "Absolutely. I was in intensive care a few months ago, and had a doctor come over to me when I was extremely vulnerable and said, 'Have you considered assisted dying?', I would have felt under real pressure to do that.' Lord Shinkwin said he and other peers will now amend the Bill so it has greater safeguards. As it is a private member's Bill and not a government initiative, some peers are vowing to try to block it altogether. ASSISTED DYING VOTE What Happens Next? - With the Commons backing the Bill, it now moves to the House of Lords for detailed debate and scrutiny. - Peers can suggest amendments, which would send the Bill back to the Commons — a process known as 'ping pong'. - But because this is a major conscience issue, the unelected Lords are unlikely to block it outright after it passed the elected House. - Supporters hope it will win final approval and receive Royal Assent by October, officially becoming law. - A four-year implementation period will follow, allowing time to establish the new system, including expert panels and regulatory safeguards.

ITV News

2 hours ago

• ITV News

Health Secretary says Asissted dying will take 'time and money' away from the NHS

Wes Streeting has warned that legalising assisted dying would take 'time and money' away from other parts of the health service. The Health Secretary, who opposed the legislation in the Commons, said better end-of-life care was needed to prevent terminally ill people feeling they had no alternative but to end their own life. Streeting, writing on his Facebook page, said he could not ignore the concerns 'about the risks that come with this Bill' raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, the Association for Palliative Medicine and charities representing under-privileged groups. The Government is neutral on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill which cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday. Streeting, who was one of the most senior opponents of the legislation, said: 'Gordon Brown wrote this week that 'there is no effective freedom to choose if the alternative option, the freedom to draw on high-quality end-of-life care, is not available. "Neither is there real freedom to choose if, as many fear, patients will feel under pressure to relieve their relatives of the burden of caring for them, a form of coercion that prioritising good end-of-life care would diminish.' He is right. 'The truth is that creating those conditions will take time and money. 'Even with the savings that might come from assisted dying if people take up the service – and it feels uncomfortable talking about savings in this context to be honest – setting up this service will also take time and money that is in short supply. 'There isn't a budget for this. Politics is about prioritising. It is a daily series of choices and trade-offs. I fear we've made the wrong one.' Streeting said his Department of Health and Social Care 'will continue to work constructively with Parliament to assist on technical aspects of the Bill' as it goes through the House of Lords. Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen urged peers not to block the landmark legislation. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. 'They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz off to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lords and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not a very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.'