The Albanese government is considering a copyright compromise that would let AI companies train on Australian creative works by default, forcing rights holders to opt out if they want to protect their material. The proposal, revealed in consultation documents tabled in the Senate on Tuesday, has drawn sharp criticism from independent senator David Pocock, who said it would put "AI companies' interests over everyday Australians."
The documents emerged as senior personnel from OpenAI met with Labor ministers this week, warning that Australia's copyright laws were preventing the company from training models locally. The consultation paper, titled "AI on Australian Terms," suggests that voluntary deals between AI firms and the vast number of small individual creators online "is not realistic/possible."
How the proposed access would work
One option under consideration would require rights holders to "digitally protect" their material if they do not want AI models trained on it - a requirement creators say is not feasible. Another would allow AI companies to access unprotected online material as long as they struck deals with enough businesses.
A third approach would let AI companies negotiate with rights holder organisations to gain access rights that extend even to content made by creators who are not members of that organisation. A licence covering one category, such as music or text, would apply broadly across the many small creators within that industry.
Pocock said the compromise would throw protections for creatives "under the bus" in pursuit of datacentre funding. "The burden should not fall on Australians to defend the rights they already hold over content they create and own and invest in," he said.
Ministers push back on 'ultimatum' claims
OpenAI's vice-president for global policy, Ann O'Leary, told The Australian newspaper that the company "isn't ready to have that conversation if we can't get through the gating problem of the copyright barriers." The newspaper characterised the comments as an ultimatum, a framing Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said was "overstating" the remarks. OpenAI has asked the paper to correct its headline.
Assistant technology minister Andrew Charlton told News24 he had not seen any ultimatum and would reject one if it were issued. "We want to support Australian artists. We want to give them control over their work. We want to make sure they're compensated, if they choose to have it used," Charlton said. "We're not compromising them or trading them off. So if we lose some datacentres over this, so be it."
Industry minister Tim Ayres had said on Monday that the government's forthcoming AI rules would "in no way" involve a reduction in copyright protection. A spokesperson for Attorney General Michelle Rowland, who is running the consultation, said any future copyright changes would deliver "meaningful control and fair compensation."
Why this matters for creatives
The core tension here is between scale and individual rights. AI companies need vast amounts of training data, but Australia's copyright framework was built for a world where licensing happened deal by deal. The government's consultation documents acknowledge that individual negotiations with millions of small creators are not practical - but the proposed solutions shift the burden onto creators to police how their work is used.
For working creatives - writers, musicians, visual artists - the opt-out model would mean actively monitoring and protecting every piece of work they publish online. The extended licensing proposal could see your content swept into a deal you never agreed to, negotiated by an organisation you never joined. Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young called the suggestions "abhorrent," saying "every Australian deserves to get paid for the work that they make."
Creatives following this debate should watch whether the government holds the line Charlton described - no compromise, even at the cost of datacentre investment - or whether the consultation leads to a framework that treats creative work as raw material for Generative AI and LLM training by default. The practical question is whether the final rules require AI companies to seek permission before using your work, or require you to stop them after the fact.
Your membership also unlocks:
