内容摘要："Nil is a form of compensation," Macpherson added, while ruling it out for farms.

"Nil is a form of compensation," Macpherson added, while ruling it out for farms.

The fierce battle over artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright - which pits the government against some of the biggest names in the creative industry - returns to the House of Lords on Monday with little sign of a solution in sight.A huge row has kicked off between ministers and peers who back the artists, and shows no sign of abating.

It might be about AI but at its heart are very human issues: jobs and creativity.It's highly unusual that neither side has backed down by now or shown any sign of compromise; in fact if anything support for those opposing the government is growing rather than tailing off.This is "unchartered territory", one source in the peers' camp told me.

The argument is over how best to balance the demands of two huge industries: the tech and creative sectors.More specifically, it's about the fairest way to allow AI developers access to creative content in order to make better AI tools - without undermining the livelihoods of the people who make that content in the first place.

What's sparked it is the uninspiringly-titled Data (Use and Access) Bill.

This proposed legislation was broadly expected to finish its long journey through parliament this week and sail off into the law books.He once said copyright law was "very certain", now he says it is "not fit for purpose".

Perhaps to an extent both those things are true.The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology say that they're carrying out a wider consultation on these issues and will not consider changes to the Bill unless they're completely satisfied that they work for creators.

If the "ping pong" between the two Houses continues, there's a small chance the entire bill could be shelved; I'm told it's unlikely but not impossible.If it does, some other important elements would go along with it, simply because they are part of the same bill.