To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of recent developments in the UK’s streaming and cinema sector, in particular the impact of the bid by Netflix to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery.

My Lords, in begging leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper, I declare my interest as deputy chairman of the Telegraph Media Group.

The way we consume entertainment is changing rapidly, driving greater consolidation in the streaming and entertainment markets. Cinemas and independent British content play a vital role in our communities, and DCMS works closely with the BFI and the UK Cinema Association to ensure that they continue to thrive. Given legal and commercial sensitivities, it would not be appropriate to comment on any live or potential merger involving Warner Bros. Discovery; should any transaction by any company progress, it would be up to the CMA to examine its implications for competition and consumers.

My Lords, noble Lords will be aware that on Friday, Netflix, doubtless terrified of the prospect of this Oral Question and the ferocious scrutiny of your Lordships’ House, withdrew its bid for Warner Bros. Discovery in favour of Paramount Skydance. Will the Minister join me in welcoming the news, which is good for British consumers, who will continue to benefit from choice in the streaming market, good for our world-class content creators and good for the British cinema industry, which is vital to our high streets? Will she also agree that the bid highlighted the importance of intellectual property and the strength of the UK’s copyright regime and confirm that the Government will continue to protect UK rights holders by ruling out any new copyright exemptions that would allow big tech to scrape UK content with impunity?

While I do not necessarily agree with the noble Lord’s analysis of the reason Netflix withdrew its bid, the Government recognise the importance of a competitive and diverse streaming market for consumers, creators and the wider screen sector. We also recognise the vital role of intellectual property in a strong copyright regime. That is why the Secretaries of State for DSIT and DCMS are working closely with the creative and AI sectors to consider all potential options and get to the right solution. We have convened expert working groups and parliamentarians, including a number of noble Lords, to inform our approach and will continue to engage stakeholders to ensure that our copyright framework values and protects human creativity. We will publish a comprehensive report and economic impact assessment by 18 March this year.

My Lords—

My Lords—

My Lords, we will have the Cross Benches next, then we will come to Labour.

My Lords, I declare an interest as a television producer. The Media Act set up prominence for public service broadcasters in the digital space, but it does not cover video-sharing platforms such as YouTube, which is where increasing numbers of young people are watching their content. Now that the BBC has announced a partnership with YouTube, does the Minister agree that the prominence regime should be extended to amplify discoverability of public service broadcasting content on these services?

Public service broadcasters are vital, and it is important for us to recognise how central YouTube is to a number of young people’s access to content. We welcome ofcom’s recommendation that public service broadcasters and platforms such as YouTube work together urgently to ensure that public service media content is made prominent on fair terms. We are considering Ofcom’s recommendation for legislation to support this. However, we want to see the outcome of these discussions in the first instance and encourage YouTube and PSBs to work together to try to achieve a deeper partnership that could benefit them and audiences. If I have not quite answered the noble Viscount’s question, I am happy to pick that up with him afterwards.

My Lords, I join the noble Lord, Lord Black, in welcoming the news that he mentioned and highlighting the importance of intellectual property and the UK’s copyright regime. Other jurisdictions are now moving away from weakening copyright. Australia has ruled out new exceptions, creators are prevailing in cases in the US courts and EU policymakers are exploring stronger rights. Does my noble friend the Minister accept that weakening UK copyright law now would be economically and strategically misguided, just as the value of high-quality creative content is becoming clearer to AI developers and legislators worldwide?

The Government want a copyright regime that values and protects human creativity, can be trusted and unlocks innovation. As I mentioned, expert working groups and a parliamentary working group have been convened and stakeholders will continue to be engaged as Ministers consider all options. I have been told that I can confidently say that we will publish a full report, economic impact assessment and consultation response by 18 March. I look forward to future debates covering the outcome of that process.

My Lords, will the Government accept that if we as a nation are to continue to be as successful in this area as we have been, we must look to the training set-up for those who are creating the content? How are the Government encouraging people to take up careers in this, especially at level 4 and 5 qualifications? Will the higher education sector actually take part in providing these services?

Is that related to AI or content generally?

Content.

In relation to the screen workforce and skills, we are investing across the skills pipeline: there is £10 million for the National Film and Television School expansion, and we are scaling up the British Film Institute Film Academy and delivering short stories through the growth and skills levy. We are keen that young people and people throughout their careers can access opportunities to be part of what we consider to be one of the jewels in Britain’s creative crown.

My Lords, the Government are considering a commercial research exception that would deny streamers the right to withhold consent for use of content when it is used in research and development, but all AI pretraining is technically R&D. Does the Minister accept that this would fatally undermine licensing markets, with payment only at a point of market entry after a leverage is lost? The best thing the Government could do is to rule out any such exception.

It would be a bit pre-emptive of me to rule out any exception before the reports I have mentioned are published. I would be very happy to return to your Lordships’ House to discuss this matter further once that has taken place.

My Lords, with regard to the original Question, decisions such as this have the potential to significantly affect our creative workforce in this area, particularly the freelance workforce, in terms of size and rates of pay. Will these concerns be a significant part of the new freelance champion’s remit, and when will we hear more about this new role?

Anticipating that this question might come up, I asked whether I was able to give a definitive date for when the freelance champion will be appointed. Unfortunately, my wording is still just “as swiftly as possible”. I can report to your Lordships’ House that the Minister for Creative Industries, my colleague in the other place, Ian Murray, has held a round table with the sector to work through a number of the issues around the remit of this role. I genuinely hope, for a whole host of reasons, to be able to report back to your Lordships’ House on the next occasion I am asked that question. At the moment, unfortunately, my answer is “as swiftly as possible”.

My Lords, can I encourage my noble friend the Minister to regard these questions as a sort of canary in the coal mine? The Government’s original opt-out proposals on AI exemptions obviously caused a great deal of consternation in the House, and I think the idea of a commercial research exemption would be similarly difficult if it were the proposal the Government eventually came forward with. Even if the Minister cannot rule something out at this stage, can she at least acknowledge the fact that many of us in the House regard that as little more than a smokescreen for mass copyright theft?

I have heard that loud and clear, and I will convey the sentiment of the House back to colleagues in DCMS.

My Lords, I declare an interest as chair of the Authors’ Licensing and Collecting Society. The Minister said that she cannot at this stage rule out certain aspects of what might be contained in the paper due from the Secretary of State this March, but can she rule in the importance of making sure that AI developers must license UK content for the training and grounding of their models?

Our priority is to ensure that the UK is ready for AI-related risks while supporting responsible innovation and long-term growth. We are considering all potential options to deliver on the UK’s ambition. It would be a very foolish and brave Minister to pre-empt a report that has yet to be published, but I look forward to future debates on this matter.

Even if the Minister cannot rule out specific measures, can she perhaps agree that weakening UK copyright law now would be misguided?

The only thing I am very clear on is that, like noble Lords, we want a copyright regime that values and protects human creativity, can be trusted and unlocks innovation. As I said, I cannot pre-empt the report, but I look forward to future debates on this matter.