The decision to announce this comes after multiple music artists including Sam Fender, Dua Lipa, and Coldplay have urged Sir Keir Starmer to protect fans from exploitation. The government has decided to set the limit at the original cost, or face value of the ticket, whilst also promising to take measures to cap any extra fees to keep the price as close to face value as possible.

The Department for Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS) will announce its plans to end ticket touting, making resale tickets cheaper on average by £37, allowing fans to save a collective of £112m per year.

Resale platforms will also have a legal duty to monitor and enforce the new regulations.

The move comes after a letter written by some of the biggest names in music such as Dua Lipa, Coldplay, Sam Fender, Radiohead, and The Cure. In the letter, more than 40 musicians urged the prime minister to “stop touts from fleecing fans” and cap the price tickets can be charged when tickets are resold.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) announced on Tuesday (July 22) that these changes – made in partnership with major labels – will “deliver tens of millions of pounds in new investment to support musicians by 2030” and “provide a major boost for UK music creators”.

The plans have been put forward by the Creator Remuneration Working Group (CRWG) – which is chaired by Creative Industries Minster Sir Chris Bryant MP – and will include a new framework for the renegotiation of contracts by artists who signed a record deal before the ‘boom’ of streaming platforms.

The CRWG and major labels have also revealed plans to support songwriters and composers via the payment of expenses for recording sessions. The changes will also see an uplift in the fees for session musicians – with pop sessions seeing a rise of up to 40 per cent, ensuring that they are “more fairly paid for their work”.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Featured Artists Coalition (FAC) (@featuredartistscoalition)

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has explained the need for the changes, saying: “Streaming has totally revolutionised how audiences discover and enjoy music, and how artists connect with their fans across the globe. But we have heard loud and clear from creators that more needs to be done to ensure they are fairly compensated when their work is used on streaming platforms.”

One of the main factors of this new deal is the protection of legacy artists. The landscape of the music industry is unrecognisable from when these musicians signed their first record label, and the government has recognised this with the new protections.

Speaking about this specific issue, Sir Chris Bryant MP said: “One of my concerns has been legacy artists; artists who are important in the streaming world and sometimes their work suddenly comes back into prominence, but they hardly earn anything from streaming because they’re still on legacy contracts.

“What we’ve been doing through the CRWG is trying to get the record labels to preferably wipe off all overdue balances. If they’re not going to do that, then to renegotiate with legacy artists so that they’re not on five, six, seven per cent of royalty rates are on something more like 25 to 30 per cent.”

Despite this news being welcomed by the music industry, many still feel that a lot more has to be done and that longstanding issues with streaming inequality still remains.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Music Venue Trust (@musicvenuetrust)

The Council of Music Makers said in a statement: “In 2021 Parliament’s Culture, Media and Sport Committee raised several fundamental issues regarding the streaming business model, calling for a ‘complete reset’. These issues remain largely unresolved, as major labels say they will not address systematic inequalities in the way streaming works voluntarily.

“This means our copyright law is currently failing to empower and protect the UK’s human creators because of the inequitable policies of major right-holders.”

Calls for the improvement and protection of musicians rights have only gained traction in the last year or so, with the likes of Music Venue Trust and Featured Artists Coalition gaining more recognition. Whether the UK government is doing enough to tackle these issues, time will tell.

Head to musicvenuetrust.com to learn more about the charity aiming to “protect, secure and improve Grassroots Music Venues” and keep an eye on mxdwn.co.uk to keep up to date with this evolving story.

At the heart of the strategy is the Music Growth Package, which will deliver £10 million in public funding annually over the next three years. This investment aims to empower new talent across the UK through enhanced opportunities for touring, live performance, mentoring, and music exports. The government hopes to support the breakthrough of artists at both domestic and international levels, helping to amplify British music on the world stage.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by UK MUSIC (@_ukmusic)

A significant portion of the funding is also earmarked for grassroots venues – vital spaces that help to support and launch new talent. These funds will help secure the future of local music venues, enabling them to host more emerging artists and contribute to the vibrancy of the UK’s live music scene.

In addition to direct investment, the government will launch a Creative Content Exchange, a new digital platform described as a “trusted marketplace” for licensing and trading digital cultural assets. This initiative is designed to open up fresh revenue streams for creators, rights-holders, and content owners, particularly in the rapidly evolving digital economy.

The plan also addresses long-standing concerns around music streaming. The government will work to broker an industry-led agreement that aims to improve remuneration for artists – particularly legacy performers and session musicians – many of whom have seen little benefit from the rise of streaming services. This new approach seeks to modernise contracts and ensure fairer distribution of streaming revenues.

Another critical element of the proposal is a commitment to strengthening the UK’s copyright and intellectual property regime, particularly in light of the fast-growing influence of artificial intelligence in music creation and consumption. This move responds to concerns voiced by artists and rights organisations over how AI-generated content could undermine creative ownership and revenue.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy emphasised the UK’s global reputation for music excellence in her remarks: “The UK music industry is truly world-leading – home to exceptional talent, iconic venues, and live events that draw fans from around the world. That’s why music will be a key pillar of our Sector Plan, with the power to drive economic growth and create good jobs in every part of our country, as we deliver our Plan for Change.”

As part of the wider Creative Industries Council’s vision to make the UK the world’s leading creative force by 2035, this new funding package signals the government’s renewed commitment to music as both a cultural asset and a powerful driver of economic innovation.

The new investment builds on prior initiatives, including the £85 million Creative Foundations Fund, which supports the survival of cultural buildings and institutions, and Arts Council England’s £446 million National Portfolio, which provides ongoing support to artists and arts organisations across the UK.

 To read more on the government’s commitments to supporting the UK music industry, our previous coverage on the 2025 Music export growth scheme can be read here.

Whilst speaking on BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg’s show on Sunday, the ‘Yellow Brick Road’ singer opened up about how the ministers’ plans to allow AI firms to use artists’ content without paying them would be “committing theft, thievery on a high scale”.

The UK government’s proposals to allow tech firms to use copyrighted material as training data has been a subject under fire from numerous big names of the music industry such as Paul McCartney, Annie Lennox, Dua Lipa, Thom Yorke and Kate Bush.

More than 1000 musicians featured on the silent album ‘Is This What We Want?’ released in February, in protest at the UK government’s planned changes to copyright law. All profits were donated to the music charity Help Musicians. The album, also supported by Billy Ocean, Ed O’Brien of Radiohead and Bastille’s Dan Smith, as well as The Clash, Mystery Jets and Jamiroquai, features sound recordings of empty studios and performance spaces, demonstrating what the artists fear is the potential impact of the proposed law change.

The track-listing for the record simply spells out the message: “The British government must not legalise music theft to benefit AI companies.”

Imogen Heap, Yusuf/Cat Stevens and Riz Ahmed have also backed the silent album release as well as Tori Amos and Hans Zimmer. Composer Max Richter, noted how the plans not only have an impact on musicians but “impoverish creators” across the board, from writers to visual artists and beyond.

In 2023, UK music contributed a record £7.6 billion to the economy, external.

In a letter to The Times, signatories including Sir Paul, Lord Lloyd Webber and Sir Stephen Fry said that changes to the law will allow big tech to raid the creative sectors. They were joined by the likes of Bush, Ed Sheeran, Dua Lipa and Sting in opposing plans to change copyright laws.

Criticising Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s team, Elton said they would “rob young people of their legacy and their income”, adding that he thought they were “just being absolute losers, and I’m very angry about it”.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Ed Sheeran (@teddysphotos)

The initiative comes amid growing concerns over cuts to arts funding and the diminishing role of music in the national curriculum. Reports have shown that music education in state schools has suffered significantly over the past decade, particularly in economically disadvantaged areas. The open letter argues that without proper funding, music will become an exclusive privilege for wealthier students, further deepening inequalities in the industry.

Sheeran, who himself benefited from state-funded programmes in his youth, stressed the importance of ensuring that young people, regardless of background, have the chance to pursue a career in music. In his Instagram post, the musician said: “As a young music student and aspiring artist, I benefited from opportunities in and out of school to learn & grow. Unfortunately, after decades of defunding and de-prioritising, music is no longer a right for all children – it’s a luxury for only a few.”

Other notable artists who have co-signed the letter include Paloma Faith, Annie Lennox, and Myles Smith, who also commented on Sheeran’s post stating: “Governments need to realise the importance of music not only as a cultural export and financial hub, but as the foundation and key feature of our society and community. Growing up in working-class Luton, access to music wasn’t just a way out – it was a way of living. It gave me purpose, belonging, and a voice. That’s why investing in music matters. It changes lives. It changed mine.” In January 2025, Sheeran has established the Ed Sheeran Foundation, aiming to empower children across the UK with meaningful music education. The foundation seeks to address the decline in music education within state schools by providing support and advocating for equal access to high-quality music programs. ​

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Ed Sheeran Foundation (@edsheeranfnd)

Additionally, The UK-based charity, Youth Music, invests in grassroots organisations and young creatives to ensure all young people have access to music. Over 25 years, Youth Music has invested over £263 million to secure music’s future and improve industry representation, making the next generation of creative talent more diverse and inclusive.​In November 2024, they partnered with Spotify to create a dedicated fund aimed at supporting 15 grassroots youth spaces across the UK that were facing imminent closure or struggling to survive.

The letter calls for a long-term funding commitment to improve music education infrastructure, hire specialist teachers, and provide instruments to students in need. Whilst the government has yet to issue a formal response, campaigners hope that growing public support will put pressure on policymakers to act swiftly. This bold move by Sheeran and his fellow artists signals a crucial moment for the future of music education in the UK.

Originating in 2014 as a scheme to provide direct financial support to independent acts, MEGS has allowed acts to use high-quality marketing and promotional compaigns abroad, in an attempt to attract new fans overseas, create bigger touring opportunities and generate revenue. These outcomes broaden the UK’s music export potential, giving UK artists access to global markets, fine-tuning the UK music industry with fresh talent to revitalise the British economy.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy spoke about the benefits of MEGS, stating: “The Music Export Growth Scheme has helped so many of our talented homegrown artists launch their careers internationally. As part of our Plan for Change, we are supporting our creative industries to reach their full potential including through this latest round of funding, which will help the next generation of artists to tour abroad, market themselves to new audiences and showcase the best of British culture and creativity to the world.”

British music is going global!

We’re thrilled to announce the 58 recipients of funding from Round 23 of the Music Export Growth Scheme! In partnership with @DCMS and @biztradegovuk

Can you see your favourite artist?

Read more about MEGS here: https://t.co/1lIJoSjMcBpic.twitter.com/T4mFoYP89w

— BPI (@bpi_music) March 8, 2025

Supporting thousands of musical acts across all genres since it’s ascension, MEGS has assisted in the creation of international careers of Jungle, Ezra Collective, Dave, beabadoobee and so many more.

Acts apply for grants ranging from £5,000 to £50,000 to facilitate efforts to launch their career’s overseas.

The news of this year’s scheme not long follows its negative attention in the media after Irish hip-hop trio KNEECAP took the UK government to court, after their application for the grant in 2023 was declined early last year. The group won the legal battle, on the grounds of discrimination, which alerted to the dangers of the scheme being hyper-politicised as it became apparent the then-Conservative government opposed KNEECAP’s application based on their fervent pro-Ireland stance, highly provocative and politically-charged musical content.

The Irish band Kneecap have won a discrimination case against the UK government.

The trio launched legal action after the former business secretary Kemi Badenoch withdrew their arts grant.

Kneecap claimed this discriminated against them because of their political opinions. pic.twitter.com/QAh9ydNNcY

— Channel 4 News (@Channel4News) November 29, 2024

This year’s £1.6 million is the most the scheme has ever given away to its participants, this comes at a time where the government are focusing on their upcoming Industrial Strategy to promote growth in the UK’s creative industries. The sector reportedly employs more than 2.4 million people and is worth almost £125 billion to the UK economy.

When speaking on the UK Creative Industries Sector Gareth Thomas, Minister for Exports and Small Businesses, said: “The UK has always led the way with its world-renowned musical acts, and this funding is vital to supporting smaller music companies to seize opportunities abroad. Not only will this help shine a spotlight on the best of British talent globally, but it will drive exports aboard, amplifying growth at home in the UK.”

This year’s eclectic mix of beneficiaries of the Music Growth Export Scheme include: Blossoms, Lambrini Girls, Matt Maltese, Nova Twins, Soft Play, Wunderhorse and more. You can find the full list here.

Artists like Paloma Faith have spoken out against Artificial Intelligence on red carpet:

@brits @paloma faith flying the flag for true creativity #BRITs #MakeItFair ♬ original sound – BRITs

The Don’t Let AI Steal Our Music campaign, launched by BPI, builds on the earlier Make It Fair initiative, which gained widespread support across the UK’s creative industries when it debuted in the media on February 25. The movement also follows the release of Is This What We Want?, a silent album featuring the backing of over 1,000 musicians as a form of protest against the government’s proposals.

In a collective effort artists including Kate Bush, Damon Albarn, and Cat Stevens, released the silent album which features recordings of empty studios and performance spaces, symbolizing the potential impact on artists’ livelihoods. In addition, a new website, dontletaistealourmusic.com, has been launched to provide more details on the campaign and its objectives.

The UK government is considering changes to copyright law that would allow global AI companies to train generative AI models using the country’s music, books, films, and other creative works—without requiring permission or compensation for creators and rights-holders.

While the proposals suggest that creators could theoretically ‘opt out’ of having their work used for AI training, experiences in other markets have shown that such opt-out systems are ineffective and fail to prevent misuse or unauthorised exploitation. Copyright law exists to protect original works of authorship, ensuring they cannot be copied, distributed, or performed without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.

At the @BRITs on Saturday, students of @TheBRITSchool stood with the Make It Fair campaign and the silent album ‘Is This What We Want?’.

They send a clear message to the UK Government: don’t let AI steal our music.

Find out more here: https://t.co/6q76tnoS8v pic.twitter.com/Unrdg6SLQi

— BPI (@bpi_music) March 4, 2025

Dr Jo Twist OBE, CEO of the BPI, said: “This campaign’s message to the Government is clear: don’t let AI steal our music. Thousands of Britain’s most beloved artists and creators have already spoken out against the proposed weakening of copyright law, which would have a devastating impact on the UK’s world-leading creative industries. We greatly value the artists and students who added their powerful voices to the campaign over the weekend. They represent the incredible human creativity that exists all across the UK and is so vital to protect.”

In response to the backlash, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer emphasized the importance of the creative industries and assured that no final decision has been made regarding the copyright reforms. He stated that the consultation period has concluded, and the feedback will be reviewed to balance the interests of AI advancement and creator rights

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Jimmy Page (@jimmypage)

Page detailed his own journey from session musician to one of the most famous guitar players in the world, and said his path “was not paved by algorithms or data sets” but by spontaneous improvisation and the human spirit. He also described the government’s plans as a “free pass for AI to exploit creativity without consequence” and called for legislation that protects the rights of the artist.   

Page is just one of many UK musicians to voice their concerns, including Sir Paul McCartney, Elton John, Thom Yorke, Kate Bush, and Gary Numan. The former Beatle appeared on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg in January to voice his concerns, saying, “If they take the incentive away by not protecting the copyrights, I think you’d see a loss of creativity. That’s a great pity because it brings so much joy to the world.” 

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Musicians’ Union (@wearethemu)

The Musicians Union has also voiced their own concerns and released a statement last month. “The MU’s position is to oppose the exception and rights reservation system, and request that copyright be strengthened with the introduction of a new AI training right in UK copyright law.”

The proposal comes as part of the Data (Use and Access) Bill, which is currently in the committee stage in the House of Commons. The changes, which have been described as the governments’ preferred approach, would allow AI companies to data mine copyrighted works without permission under an opt-out system, which as Page pointed out, is impossible in reality.

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee is headed by Dame Caroline Dinenage, who has described the government’s opt-in, opt-out stance as “the legislative equivalent of the hokey-kokey.” The Labour government’s own MP, James Frith, spoke out about the importance of copyright, enabling those who create art to also be able to make a living from it.

There is one week left to respond to the Government’s Copyright & AI consultation, which sets out damaging proposals to the UK’s world-leading creative industries.

Find out how you can voice your opposition here https://t.co/vhaVYD0htq pic.twitter.com/iA93EkYPYC

— BPI (@bpi_music) February 18, 2025

The debate has been growing, and just last week, over 1000 UK artists put their name to a silent album. ‘Is This What We Want?’ sent a stark message to legislators, with a track listing that spelled out ‘The British Government Must Not Legalise Music Theft To Benefit AI Companies’.  

Peter Kyle, Minister for Science, Innovation and Technology, one of the sponsors of the Bill, has defended the proposals. He told LBC that the aim is to create a market in the UK where AI companies respect domestic laws, arguing that loopholes are already being exploited in other countries.

“I will not be made to choose one industry over another.”@peterkyle speaks on @LBC about the recent AI Copyright Consultation pic.twitter.com/YTcr3OgHER

— Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (@SciTechgovuk) February 28, 2025

 The committee stage allows for amendments to be proposed based on various industry consultations. As the Bill moves into the report stage, it will be opened up to be debated in the House of Commons, further allowing refinements.

With time running out, the input of artists like Page will be crucial in shaping the Bill into something that works for those who rely on the protections offered by copyrights.

Elton John and a chorus of creative elites are urging the UK government to rethink AI copyright proposals.

Why it matters? The current plan could allow AI to mine creative works *without* permission, risking a blow to artist rights and economic growth.

Creative icons like…

— AI News (@DailyAITechNews) February 22, 2025

The proposed changes introduce an “opt-out” system, meaning artists and creators would need to proactively prevent their work from being used by AI systems. Opponents argue this unfairly shifts the responsibility onto artists, rather than requiring AI companies to seek permission before using copyrighted material. Earlier this month, the House of Lords has rejected the proposed copyright law changes, meaning the UK government’s attempt to relax copyright protections has been blocked for now. However, if the House of Commons strongly supports the changes, they may attempt to override the Lords’ decision. Alternatively, public and industry pressure could influence future policymaking.

Sir Elton John expressed his deep concern over the potential impact on the UK’s creative sector to the Daily Mail, stating that these reforms could “destroy the UK’s leadership that has been hard won” and “give it all away for nothing”. With this new statement, the musician joins the likes of Ringo Starr and Kate Bush to speak about the worrying dangers of AI in the music industry. The former Beatles member Sir Paul McCartney has also previously voiced concerns over AI exploitation of artists’ work, emphasising that the profits from AI-generated works should rightfully go to the original creators.Music mogul Simon Cowell has also voiced his opposition, warning that AI, if unregulated, could “wipe out” musicians, songwriters, and industry professionals. He stressed that maintaining strong copyright protections is vital to ensuring that creative individuals receive fair compensation for their work. Bestselling author Kate Mosse has spoken out from the literary perspective, warning that AI’s access to published works without consent could have devastating consequences for writers.

The UK government has launched a consultation on the proposed changes, seeking to balance innovation with the protection of creators. In January 2025, a government spokesperson stated that they aim to “deliver legal certainty through a copyright regime that provides creators with real control, transparency, and helps them license their content”.

As discussions continue, the unified stance of these influential artists highlights the growing concerns over AI’s potential to disrupt the creative industries. Their call to action underscores the urgent need for policies that safeguard the rights of musicians, writers, and other artists in an era of rapid technological advancement.

McCartney’s remarks highlight a growing frustration among artists whose work is used to train AI without credit or compensation. “You get these artists coming through who write a beautiful song, and they don’t own it, and they don’t have anything to do with it, and anybody can rip it off. The truth of it is that the money is going somewhere. When it makes its way onto streaming platforms, somebody is getting the money and it should be the creator rather than some tech giant.”

His comments come as the UK government’s consultation on AI and copyright enters its final month, set to close on February 25. The consultation explores approaches like an opt-out system for creators. This approach was criticised by one of the shows panelists, Baroness Beeban Kidron, who likened it to a shop owner opting out of shoplifting in a House of Lords debate.

Kidron, who sits as a crossbench peer and advises the Institute for Ethics in AI at Oxford University, used her appearance on the Sunday show to correct a figure repeated by the government. The claim is that AI could inject £400 billion into the UK by 2030. In fact, this figure was presented by an AI lobbying group, paid for by Google, and made up by generative AI as a global estimate.

Baroness Kidron is spot on here re. the UK government’s plan to give AI companies the life’s work of the country’s creators for free.

“It is shocking that a government that promised a period of rule of law is enabling theft at scale.”https://t.co/HsDvlCOkkq pic.twitter.com/yXMbNU7QQJ

— Ed Newton-Rex (@ednewtonrex) January 15, 2025

The Musicians Union have weighed in on the government’s consultation, cautiously saying: “A solution is available that will allow developers to comply with the law and license musical works that are willingly offered by creators for the purpose of training AI systems – in return for a fair share of the income generated from the exploitation of the output. The MU will be fighting to make sure this happens.”  

While the UK debates its stance, and government departments fight between themselves, other regions have already moved on with legislation. The EU implemented limited protections for copyrighted material in July 2024, and Tennessee passed the Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security (ELVIS) Act last March. The latter was criticised by AI companies, who claimed that the act’s language was overly vague, and therefore open to misuse.

McCartney’s plea for fairness was echoed in a petition he signed last year, which calls for governments to overhaul how AI companies handle copyrighted material. With over 40,000 signatures, the petition has garnered support from figures like ABBA’s Bjorn Ulvaeus and Kate Bush, as well as an assortment of actors and writers.  

However, McCartney’s comments go beyond policy, addressing the broader cultural implications of AI. “If they take the incentive away by not protecting the copyrights, I think you’d see a loss of creativity. That’s a great pity because it brings so much joy to the world.” 

Comment byu/kaychyakay from discussion innews

A similar sentiment was shared by synth-pop pioneer Gary Numan last week, who optimistically predicted that audiences may eventually turn their backs on AI art in favour of work born from real human experiences. This was backed up by a fan responding to the McCartney interview, who said: “In the long run, I hope that the need for human [spontaneity] will be valued for what it’s worth.”

This debate isn’t just about copyright; it’s about the future of culture. As Foreign Secretary David Lammy recently said, soft power—driven by the UK’s creative industries—is fundamental to the nation’s global influence. For McCartney, protecting that power starts with protecting the creators.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by BBC News (@bbcnews)

The results of the consultation will be pivotal for the UK’s artists and creative industries. As McCartney said, governments should be protecting everyday people first and foremost, “so protect them!”