Select committee: Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee
Conclusion 1
Fifth Report - Creator remuneration
Published 10 Apr 2024
Paragraph 29
Addressed to Department for Culture, Media and Sport
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee Creator remuneration All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
Revenue from private copying from abroad is an important source of income for creators, remunerating them for the use of their works that is integral to the demand for electronic devices. Not only does a lack of such a scheme in the UK prevent British creators from receiving payments from the domestic market, but it has also put their payments from abroad under threat due to a lack of reciprocity with other countries.
From: Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, Fifth Report - Creator remuneration (HC 156), paragraph 29, 10 April 2024
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 1 November 2024 (deadline 10 June 2024).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government welcomes the report but sets out a largely evidence-gathering and industry-led approach, with few firm commitments to the legislative or statutory measures the Committee recommended.
- On a statutory private copying scheme, the government is "not ruling out" a private copying exception and levy, but "further evidence is needed"; the IPO will meet creative industries representatives on strengthening the evidence base.
- On AI and copyright, the government "intend[s] to proceed carefully but with a degree of urgency" and "hope[s] to announce next steps soon". It does not set the deadline for legislation that the Committee sought.
- On freelancers, it does not state a position on a Freelancers' Commissioner. A Good Work Review sub-group is "expected to discuss proposals" for one, and the five Good Work proposals are to be implemented "by March 2026".
- On music streaming, its "current view" is that dialogue and "industry-led action" are best. It is confident the Working Group's membership is adequate and will "adapt the group if it feels it is necessary".