What happened
The South China Morning Post reports that Hong Kong has delayed the submission of the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2025 to the Legislative Council. The bill, originally scheduled for the first half of last year, was removed from the legislative agenda in August. Instead of proceeding with statutory changes that would introduce an 'opt-out' mechanism for text and data mining, the government will first draft operational guidelines to clarify how copyright holders can manage their rights regarding AI training.
According to the South China Morning Post, Hong Kong authorities have decided to delay the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2025, which was intended to protect copyrighted works from being used to train AI models. The bill, which proposed an 'opt-out' mechanism for text and data mining, was originally scheduled to be submitted to the Legislative Council in the first half of last year but was removed from the agenda in August. It did not appear in the 2026 policy blueprint or the city's first five-year plan.
Lawmaker Johnny Ng Kit-chong, chairman of the Legco panel on commerce, industry, innovation and technology, stated that the government had postponed the legal amendment to first draft an operational guideline on the proposed 'opt-out' mechanism. He emphasized that the copyright industry needs a complete operational solution to pursue royalty recovery, noting that without such a solution, the industry would remain skeptical. Ng highlighted the need for clarification on execution details, such as whether media outlets must exclude every article from AI training.
Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Algernon Yau Ying-wah indicated that the government received 'different views and ideas' after a two-month consultation in 2024. He stated that the government needs to consider all concerns and come up with a better solution, potentially involving changes, recommendations, or guidelines for the copyright ordinance. The original amendment bill included a 'text and data mining exception' allowing 'reasonable use' of copyrighted works for AI training, with safeguards including the opt-out option and requirements for lawful access and record-keeping.
Lawmaker Kenneth Fok Kai-kong described the legislative pause as a deliberate and prudent approach driven by a lack of clear consensus locally and internationally on how copyright law should intersect with AI. He noted that creative industries are concerned about their work being freely ingested by AI models without authorization or compensation. Fok suggested a balanced approach focusing on market-driven cooperation, licensing schemes, and non-statutory guidelines, rather than rigid statutory changes that might misalign with global practices.
Sharon Wong Yin-yue, executive director of the Hong Kong Reprographic Rights Licensing Society, confirmed that the legislative amendment would not be tabled for discussion in Legco. Instead, the government will issue guidelines on using AI to different stakeholders. The society is discussing how to safeguard creative rights and plans to introduce AI-related clauses to its licensing scheme. Joshua Chu, a lawyer, highlighted the need to clarify legal liability for AI agents, especially regarding recent incidents of agentic AI causing issues without human intervention.
Source details: amp.scmp.com ↗
Why it matters
This delay reflects significant uncertainty in how copyright law should intersect with rapidly evolving AI technologies. By prioritizing guidelines over rigid legislation, Hong Kong aims to avoid misaligning with global practices while addressing industry concerns about the practicality of the proposed opt-out system. This approach allows for a more flexible, market-driven solution that can adapt to technological changes without imposing inflexible constraints on the AI sector or creative industries.
The delay in the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2025 signals a cautious approach by Hong Kong authorities in regulating AI's use of copyrighted material. By opting for guidelines first, the government aims to address practical concerns raised by both the copyright industry and the AI sector. This approach allows for flexibility and adaptation to the rapidly evolving landscape of AI technology, avoiding the pitfalls of rigid legislation that may become obsolete or misaligned with global standards.
The focus on operational guidelines rather than immediate statutory changes reflects the complexity of balancing AI development with copyright protection. The 'opt-out' mechanism, while intended to protect copyright holders, raised concerns about the burden of effort required to monitor and enforce rights. By prioritizing guidelines, the government can provide clearer instructions on how to implement these protections, potentially leading to more effective and fair outcomes for all stakeholders.
This decision also has implications for Hong Kong's position as a hub for AI innovation. By taking a prudent approach, the government aims to create a regulatory environment that supports AI development while respecting intellectual property rights. This could attract both AI companies and creative industries to Hong Kong, fostering a balanced ecosystem that encourages innovation and protects creators.
Interactive Mechanism: How It Actually Works
Explore the underlying technology behind this development interactively.
crm_get_transaction(id='4092').Impossibility results in algorithmic fairness (e.g. Kleinberg et al., Chouldechova) show what?
What to watch next
Monitor the release of the operational guidelines and any subsequent legislative proposals. Watch for how these guidelines address specific issues like royalty recovery, record-keeping, and the legal liability of AI agents. Also observe how other jurisdictions respond to similar challenges in balancing AI development with copyright protection.
The release of the operational guidelines is a key next step. These guidelines will likely provide detailed instructions on how copyright holders can exercise their opt-out rights, how AI companies should comply, and how royalty recovery can be managed. The specifics of these guidelines will be crucial in determining their effectiveness and acceptance by both the copyright and AI industries.
Monitor any subsequent legislative proposals that may follow the guidelines. If the guidelines prove insufficient or if new challenges arise, the government may revisit the legislative approach. The timing and content of any future bills will be important indicators of Hong Kong's long-term strategy for regulating AI and copyright.
Observe how other jurisdictions are addressing similar issues. Hong Kong's approach may be influenced by developments in other regions, and its decisions could also impact global standards. Comparing Hong Kong's guidelines with those of other countries can provide insights into best practices and potential areas for improvement.
Watch for reactions from key stakeholders, including the copyright industry, AI companies, and legal experts. Their feedback on the guidelines and any subsequent legislative proposals will be crucial in assessing the effectiveness of Hong Kong's approach and identifying areas for further refinement.