This Sunday, in the Royal Festival Hall in London, the biggest names in film for the Baftas – the United Kingdom of the best British and international cinema are gathering.
Among the nominees for Outstanding British Film is Wallace & Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl, who enjoyed millions from us (including, I know for sure, cabinet ministers and perhaps even our own prime minister) during the festive period.
The film is also in the race for animated feature film during this year's Oscars, where it will compete against releases of Hollywood Giants such as Disney and Dreamworks.
Revenge Most Fowl is a master class of human creativity, humor and originality that is unique and unmistakably British. It is also a work of love.
The film took meticulous work for about three years to create after they were enlightened green, with each character handmade in plasticine, every movement on the screen was carefully created in stop-motion animation and 24 individual frames that are usually needed for a second of images .
In a world of art and computer fakery generated by AI, this kind of artistry must be cherished- especially in a nation that has had an enormous cultural strength on the world stage for decades.
But instead it runs the risk of being undermined and eventually driven to extinction, all because of international technical giants.
This is because the government is consulting about major changes in copyright legislation that would give global technology companies free access to British films, books, music, news and more to train AI models – without having to pay or search for the people who have made or have to possess the rights to work.
Wallace & Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl is a master class of human creativity, humor and originality that is unique and unmistakably British (depicted: Nick Park and Merlin Crossingham)
The government suggests that makers may 'reserve their rights' by registering for their work that is used to train generative AI tools. (Shown: Keir Starmer)
The government suggests that makers may 'reserve their rights' by registering for their work that is used to train generative AI tools.
But countless experts and other countries have shown that 'unsubscribe' are impossible in practice.
Giving downcopyright water would in turn considerably lower the value of the creative output of Great Britain, which endangers the integrity of our human art attitude and our status as a world leader in creativity is endangered.
This may sound directly from Wallace & Gromit Archnemesis Feathers McGraw's PlayBook-but It is the reality with which the 2.4 million people are confronted in the United Kingdom £ 125 billion a year of creative industries and the makers whose work is offered to Silicon Valley On a silver dish.
Why do they do this? I asked Keir Starmer just before Christmas, and his answer was that the move was about stimulating innovation and 'balancing' technology and creativity – although the scales are clearly tipped in favor of Tech.
I am completely for technology, and just as enthusiastic as everyone about ways in which AI could help us tackle some of the biggest challenges of humanity.
Thousands of maker voices, including Sir Stephen Fry (depicted), spoke against the proposals
But do technology companies really need access to the British songs, literature, films and art to cure cancer or tackle climate change?
This year the Baftas has a new category: Children's and family film.
The sad reality is that if the government throws our valued makers under the bus by weakening the British Golden Standard copyright regime, our children will have less and less British culture to enjoy and to be part of it in the coming years.
Let's hope that the government listens to the thousands of maker voices who have spoken to these poorly rated proposals, from Sir Paul McCartney and Kate Bush to Richard Osman and Sir Stephen Fry, and that this is only a close shave.
Dame Caroline Dineage is the conservative MP for GoSport and chairman of the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee
