Australian Authors Reject AI Use of Their Work Despite Financial Incentives

The GIST Report: Why Australian Authors Reject AI Use of Their Work—even for Money

When news broke that Meta had trained its AI model, Llama, using a dataset of pirated books, Australian authors reacted strongly. Writers like Liane Moriarty, Tim Winton, Melissa Lucashenko, and Christos Tsiolkas found their works scraped from LibGen, an online shadow library, without permission. This incident is one of many where published books have been fed into commercial AI systems without authors' knowledge, credit, or compensation.

A new report, Australian Authors' Sentiment on Generative AI, surveyed over 400 members of the Australian Society of Authors. It offers the first large-scale insight into how Australian writers and illustrators feel about generative AI technology. The results show widespread concern. Most authors don’t want their work used to train AI—this is about more than money. It’s about consent, trust, and protecting their profession.

A Clear "No" from Most Authors

In late 2024, authors were asked whether they would allow their existing or future work to be used for AI training, with or without compensation. A solid 79% said no to using existing work, even if paid. Nearly the same percentage—77%—rejected the use of future work. Among those open to payment, half expected at least $A1,000 per work, with some naming sums in the tens or hundreds of thousands. Still, the dominant answer was a firm refusal.

This refusal creates a major challenge for publishers hoping to broker blanket licensing deals with AI companies. If most authors won’t give permission under any terms, then standard contract clauses or opt-in models are unlikely to resolve the issue ethically or practically.

Concerns Over Income Loss and the Future of Writing

Authors aren’t just worried about past works being used without consent. They fear the impact generative AI will have on their future income. Seventy percent believe AI will displace paid work for authors and illustrators. Some already report losing jobs or being offered lower rates because of assumptions that AI tools will reduce costs.

Writing is often not financially sustainable on its own. Many authors rely on other jobs or family support. The average annual income from writing in Australia was just $18,200 in 2022. AI threatens to erode this fragile foundation further. If professional writers struggle to earn a living and new voices can’t find a path into the industry, the diversity and richness of Australian storytelling will suffer.

More Than Just a Copyright Issue

This isn’t simply about rights management or royalty payments. Ninety-one percent of authors said it’s unfair for their work to be used in AI training without permission or compensation. Over half worry AI tools could mimic their creative style, raising concerns about imitation and displacement.

For many, their work is deeply personal—reflecting their voice, identity, and years of effort, often with little financial reward. The idea that a machine could copy that work without consent or credit feels like a fundamental violation.

Authors’ stance isn’t based on ignorance of AI technology. Most respondents had a moderate or strong understanding of how generative AI is trained. They distinguish between tools that support creativity and those that replace it. What they lack is transparency. Eighty percent didn’t know if their work was already used in AI training. Without clear information, informed consent is impossible, and trust erodes.

The Road Ahead: A Sustainable Creative Future Is Not Guaranteed

Generative AI is changing creative work, but the future is uncertain. If most authors refuse to allow their work to be used—even with payment—negotiated agreements between AI developers, publishers, and creators seem unlikely. This is more than a policy gap; it reflects a breakdown in trust.

Many authors feel the value of their creative work is being diminished by systems built on its use. The widespread rejection of licensing models signals a looming impasse. Moving forward without consent risks further alienating creators, making it difficult to maintain a healthy creative economy.

If writers can’t find a respected and viable role in this new landscape, Australia’s cultural life will face serious consequences. To build a fair and forward-looking creative sector, authors must be included in conversations about AI’s role in storytelling.

For writers looking to understand how AI tools might influence their work and income, exploring educational resources can be helpful. Check out AI courses designed for writers that explain how to work alongside AI ethically and effectively.