FAIR launches to defend the British public in the age of artificial intelligence.

LONDON, 5 June 2026 — The Foundation for Artificial Intelligence Rights (FAIR) is established in the United Kingdom today to advance enforceable rights, statutory transparency obligations, and meaningful public protection in the development, deployment, and governance of artificial intelligence.

FAIR exists to defend the British public in the age of AI. The Foundation pursues three objectives: making public-sector AI visible to the public, shaping fair rules for AI on the public’s behalf, and equipping people of every age to understand and use AI. It engages Parliament, the regulators, and the wider professional community on the legislative reforms the United Kingdom now requires.

Despite the deployment of artificial intelligence at scale across healthcare, education, financial services, and the wider public sector, no domestic legislation imposes binding transparency obligations upon AI developers in the United Kingdom. There is no independent audit framework, no statutory duty of disclosure regarding training data, system instructions, or commercial arrangements that influence model outputs, and no proper redress for individuals subject to opaque automated decisions. The Government’s promised AI Bill has been quietly dropped. The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 made it easier, not harder, for organisations to make automated decisions about people.

The research behind FAIR

The immediate catalyst for the Foundation was the founder’s final research project for his LLB at the University of Law, completed in April 2026. The project, The Alignment Problem: Artificial Intelligence, Copyright Law, and the Case for Legislative Reform in England and Wales, examined whether the copyright law of England and Wales is in alignment with the Government’s two stated aims for AI: to “unleash the power of AI” by positioning the United Kingdom as the most pro-technology government, and to “preserve the central role of IP in promoting human creativity and innovation”. The work focused in particular on the text and data mining exception under section 29A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and the protection of computer-generated works under section 9(3) of the same Act. The conclusion, on both heads, was that the existing law serves neither stated aim. From that finding came the conviction that a dedicated organisation was needed to carry the case for reform from research into public-facing advocacy.

What FAIR will do

FAIR pursues its three objectives through five workstreams: publishing position papers (FAIR Briefings) on questions of UK AI policy; responding to consultations issued by Parliament, Government departments, regulators, and Parliamentary Committees; producing plain-English public legal education materials; maintaining a daily public-interest register of artificial intelligence procurement, partnerships, and pilots involving United Kingdom public bodies (AI Alerts); and operating a reporting channel through which members of the public can submit reports of AI-related harms.

The five workstreams cover:

• Copyright and intellectual property reform. A balanced commercial text and data mining exception, mandatory training data disclosure, producer rights reform, and a market access provision for models trained outside the United Kingdom.
• AI and child safety. Comprehensive age gating, content provenance standards, and criminal liability for the operators of platforms that fail to implement reasonable safeguards against AI-generated child sexual abuse material.
• Public education and AI literacy. Evidence-based educational programmes and plain-language briefings on every significant AI policy development before Parliament.
• AI transparency and accountability. Statutory disclosure obligations covering training data, system instructions, and any commercial arrangements that influence AI outputs.
• Parliamentary advocacy and legislative drafting. Direct engagement with Parliamentarians, expert evidence to Select Committees, model statutory provisions, and cross-party work to shape the forthcoming AI Bill.

FAIR draws an explicit parallel between the oversight long applied to medicines and the absence of equivalent governance for artificial intelligence. The charity intends to submit expert evidence to Select Committees, draft model legislative provisions, publish plain-language briefings on every significant AI policy development before Parliament, and convene a founding cohort of partners and supporters from the legal profession, academia, public policy, technology, and the wider professional community.

Trustees and partners

FAIR is now establishing its founding Board of Trustees. It is welcoming expressions of interest from senior professionals across law, academia, public policy, technology, and the public sector who are committed to evidence-based AI governance reform. Applications and enquiries are invited at airights.org.uk/board-application.

---

Notes to editors

About FAIR

The Foundation for Artificial Intelligence Rights (FAIR) exists to defend the British public in the age of AI. FAIR is built to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability in the way artificial intelligence is procured, deployed, and governed across British public life. FAIR produces research and written evidence for Parliament and the regulators, publishes plain-English material on the law as it applies to AI, and operates a daily public-interest register of UK public-sector AI procurement.

About the founder

Scott McCulloch is the founder of FAIR. For nearly two decades, he advised drug-development organisations on the regulatory frameworks designed to protect patients in clinical trials, working with sponsors, contract research organisations and service providers across Europe, the Americas, and Asia-Pacific. The job, simply put, was to make sure the data submitted to regulators, including the FDA, the MHRA, and the EMA, is verifiable and stands up to inspection. In that world, compliance is not aspirational; it is the difference between a medicine reaching the public and failing to do so.

He is in the final year of a Bachelor of Laws (LLB) at the University of Law, graduating in summer 2026. He is preparing for admission as a practising solicitor in England and Wales. Alongside the LLB he is reading postgraduate programmes in AI Law at the University of Oxford and Intellectual Property at Brunel University London. He holds an MSc in Psychology and Neuroscience from King’s College London.

Scott McCulloch is available for interview, briefing, and background, in person in London or by video call. Subject matter spans copyright reform, AI and child safety, AI in healthcare, AI in education, parliamentary advocacy, and the parallel between pharmaceutical regulation and AI governance.

Selected statistics referenced by FAIR

• Only 9% of UK teachers feel confident teaching about AI; 76% use AI in daily work. (NEU, February 2026)
• 49% of UK schools have no AI policy at all. (Pearson School Report, December 2025)
• Ofcom fined the operator of an AI nudification site in November 2025 and opened formal investigations into AI chatbot services in January 2026.
• The Bank of England Financial Policy Committee has flagged systemic risk from growing AI use in trading, credit scoring, and operational functions. Still, no AI-specific financial rules exist in the United Kingdom. (Bank of England and PRA)
• Hidden system prompts in widely used AI products introduce systematic bias without users’ knowledge. (FAccT 2025; CHI 2026)