UK music fans don’t believe that AI can, or should, replace human artists any time soon, according to a new survey by the BPI, the trade body representing the UK’s record companies and label businesses.

After polling more than 1,700 listeners across the UK, the BPI found that music consumers strongly believe that human creativity is fundamental to music, and that music should only be ingested by AI systems when authorised.

The survey, commissioned for the BPI’s latest All About the Music 2025 yearbook, found that over 80% of UK music consumers value human-made music more than AI-generated music, while 83% think human creativity is essential in the creation of music.

Almost two-thirds (64%) said that they were not interested in AI-generated music which sounds like or impersonates their favourite artists, while 79% believe that an artist’s music or vocals should not be ingested or used by AI without permission from the artist or their record label.

Added to that, more than 81% of respondents agreed that music generated solely by AI should be clearly labelled, while 73% believe AI systems should list any music that it has ingested or used for training.

With these results, the BPI hopes to draw attention to what it called ‘highly controversial’ changes to UK copyright law currently under consideration. 

Under UK Government plans, AI firms could train genAI models using UK music, books, and film, potentially without the need for authorisation or compensation from the works’ creators or rights-holders.

Instead, creators and rightsholders would, in theory, be given the option to ‘opt out’ of having their work used to train AI models – but the trade body argues that other markets have shown such opt-out schemes are unworkable in practice, and ineffective in protecting against misuse and theft.

The BPI warned that copyright must not be weakened to favour big tech, and called for the Government to ensure transparency is an integral requirement for AI models using protected material, and that music should not be used for AI training without authorisation from the creator or rights holder.

So far, those working in the UK’s creative industries have taken a strong stand against any AI use of their material, with music legend Paul McCartney calling on the Government to do more to protect creatives from copyright law changes, and some of the world’s largest record labels, including Sony Music, Universal Music Group, and Warner Records, suing AI startups over alleged copyright violations.

Recommended reading

• Action Needed Around Copyright and Competition in AI, Open Letter Says
• Class Action Lawsuit Could Steer AI Art Copyright Debate
• Record Labels Sue AI Startups Over Music Copyright

In an even larger protest, more than 1,000 musicians, including Annie Lennox and Sam Fender, also came together to release the Is This What We Want? album, consisting of recordings of empty studios and performance spaces, representing the impact they expect the Government’s proposals to have on musicians’ livelihoods. 

The polling suggests that the UK public agrees to some extent, with 72% saying that the Government should play a role in setting restrictions over what AI can do with copyright material, while more than 61% went even further, suggesting that music generated by AI without any human creativity should not get copyright protection.

“Britain’s music fans are adding their voices to the chorus of creators and creative businesses who want to see AI develop legally, respectfully and responsibly,” said Sophie Jones, the BPI’s chief strategy officer.

“Our music business members are innovating – as they always have – with new technology, and are ambitious to play their part in driving the UK’s growth agenda. 

“But we can only realise this potential by securing our strong copyright framework, and by developing licensing partnerships that will enable creativity and AI to flourish together.”