The House of Lords just published a landmark report on AI and Copyright — Here's what it means for trademark owners
On 6 March 2026, the House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee published its report AI, Copyright and the Creative Industries (HL Paper 267). It's 83 pages long, draws on evidence from 21 witnesses and 29 written submissions, and covers everything from AI training data transparency to digital identity protection.
Most of the commentary so far has focused on what it means for the music, publishing, and film industries. That makes sense. Those sectors are at the sharp end of the AI copyright debate.
But the report matters for trademark owners too. Especially if you're a UK SME.
Here's what you need to know.
The headline: the UK is doubling down on IP protection, not weakening it
The Committee was asked to consider whether the UK should introduce a new exception to copyright law. A broad "text and data mining" (TDM) exception that would have made it easier for AI companies to train their models on copyrighted material without permission.
They rejected it. Firmly.
The Committee concluded that the existing UK copyright framework is sound. Multiple witnesses described it as the international "gold standard." The report recommended that the Government should rule out any reform that would remove the incentive to license copyrighted works for AI training.
For context: 88% of respondents to the Government's own consultation supported requiring licences in all cases. Only 3% supported the opt-out model the Government had initially preferred.
The direction of travel is clear. The UK is backing stronger IP enforcement, not weaker.
Why this matters for trademark owners
You might be thinking: this is about copyright, not trademarks. What's the connection?
Three things.
First, it signals a broader IP enforcement environment. When Parliament commits to stronger protection for one category of intellectual property, it creates momentum across the whole IP landscape. Trademark owners benefit from a culture where IP rights are taken seriously, enforced actively, and supported by policy. The alternative, a race to the bottom where IP is treated as a cost to be minimised, would have been bad news for every brand owner in the UK.
Second, mandatory transparency is coming. The report recommends that AI developers be required, by statute, to disclose what content they use for training. This isn't voluntary. The Committee wants it backed by legislation and enforced by a regulator. As transparency requirements become normal in the AI space, expect the broader conversation about "what are companies doing with my intellectual property?" to intensify. That conversation is already happening in trademark law. Every week, thousands of new marks are filed that could conflict with existing brands. The question is whether you know about them.
Third, digital identity protection is on the agenda. The Committee recommended new protections against "unauthorised digital replicas" and AI-generated content that imitates a person's style, voice, or persona. Today, this mainly affects performers and artists. But the principle extends to brands. If AI systems can generate convincing imitations of creative works, they can also generate brand names, logos, and identities that conflict with yours, at scale, and without checking.
The numbers that should concern brand owners
The report puts some striking numbers on the table:
The UK creative industries contributed £124 billion in gross value added in 2023. The AI sector contributed £12 billion in 2024. The Committee made clear it would be a poor trade to sacrifice the creative sector for speculative AI gains.
58% of surveyed photographers had already lost work to generative AI. Among authors, 86% reported decreased earnings from AI advances.
The French music streaming service Deezer found that 60,000 fully AI-generated tracks are uploaded to their platform every day, making up 39% of total daily uploads. Most are unlabelled.
34 million new synthetic images are being created each day. Detecting infringement in that volume is, as one witness put it, like finding a needle in a haystack.
These numbers are about copyright. But the underlying dynamic, AI systems generating content at superhuman speed and scale without human oversight, is a challenge for every form of intellectual property.
In the trademark world, over 203,000 applications were filed in the UK in 2025 alone. That's nearly 4,000 new marks every week. Most SME trademark owners aren't monitoring any of them.
What's happening next: the 18 March deadline
The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 requires the Government to publish two things by 18 March 2026:
An economic impact assessment of each of the four policy options from its consultation. And a report on the use of copyright works in the development of AI systems, covering technical standards, enforcement, licensing, and transparency.
That's five days from now. Whatever the Government publishes will likely set the direction of UK IP policy for the next several years. We'll be watching closely and will publish our analysis when it drops.
What should you do?
If you own a UK trademark, or if you've registered a company name that you treat as your brand, this report is a reminder that the IP landscape is shifting.
The good news: the UK is committed to strong IP protection. The bad news: enforcement is getting harder, not easier, as AI accelerates the volume and speed of new filings, new content, and new conflicts.
Here's what's in your control:
Know what's being filed. Over 203,000 trademark applications were filed last year. If someone files a mark that conflicts with yours, you have exactly 2 months to oppose it. After that, costs escalate dramatically.
Monitor your brand. Enterprise companies pay thousands a year for trademark watching services. Most SMEs do nothing. That gap is exactly where problems develop.
Check your brand for free. You can run a free conflict check at tmguard.uk/check. It scans the UK trademark register in seconds and shows you what's out there.
The bigger picture
The Lords report paints a picture of two possible futures for the UK. In one, the country becomes a world leader in responsible, licensing-based AI development, where IP rights are respected and creators are fairly compensated. In the other, the UK drifts towards acceptance of large-scale unlicensed use of creative content, with most benefits going to a small number of overseas firms.
The Committee chose the first path. That's good news for anyone who builds, owns, or relies on intellectual property in the UK.
For trademark owners specifically, the message is simple: the framework is strong, but enforcement depends on awareness. You can't protect what you don't monitor.
TMGuard monitors the weekly UK IPO journal and alerts you when a conflicting trademark is filed, from £99/year. Check your brand free at tmguard.uk/check
Sources:
House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee, AI, Copyright and the Creative Industries, HL Paper 267, 4th Report of Session 2024-26 (published 6 March 2026)
HM Government written evidence to the Committee (AIC0013), January 2026
Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, sections 135-137