Australia's Shocking Copyright Stance: Tech Giants Get Free AI Content
Australia’s creative industries are reeling from a controversial proposal by the Productivity Commission that could allow tech giants to use copyrighted content for training Artificial Intelligence (AI) models without compensation. The interim report, “Harnessing Data and Digital Technology,” released on August 6, 2025, has sparked widespread backlash, with critics labeling it a “blueprint for theft” and a “retroactive legalisation of theft.”
The core of the Productivity Commission’s recommendation is the introduction of a Text and Data Mining (TDM) exception to Australia’s Copyright Act. This would enable AI companies to mine and utilise copyrighted material – including films, photographs, scripts, music, and books – for training purposes without needing licensing agreements, permission, or remuneration. The Commission’s argument is that AI models, many already trained overseas on unlicensed material and used in Australia, have effectively made the “horse bolted,” and a TDM exception would allow smaller local institutions to compete. However, this stance has been met with skepticism, particularly given that major tech companies like Google, Meta, and Atlassian have actively lobbied for broader AI access to data.
Creative sector bodies, including the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance (MEAA), Australian Writers’ Guild (AWG), Australian Society of Authors (ASA), and the Copyright Agency, have vehemently rejected the proposal. They argue that such an exception would devalue the work of creators, undermine existing and potential licensing markets, and allow tech giants to profit freely from human creation. MEAA Chief Executive Erin Madeley stated that the recommendations were akin to “throwing Australia’s creative and media workers under a bus,” with no protective measures for Australian workers or creative assets. The Australian Writers’ Guild highlighted that the Productivity Commission conceded large AI models have already been trained on copyrighted Australian materials without consent or compensation. Authors have expressed being “livid” over their works potentially being used without consent to train AI, with reports of thousands of books allegedly pirated and used by Meta for its generative AI tool.
The Australian Copyright Council and the Copyright Agency have consistently argued that Australia’s current copyright laws are “fit-for-purpose” and that a new compensation scheme for creators whose content is used by AI companies would be a more appropriate solution. News Corp Australia’s executive chairman Michael Miller also criticised the proposal, asserting that Australia is being asked to “trade away our cultural, social and economic sovereignty” without evidence that current laws stifle innovation.
While the Productivity Commission’s report emphasizes AI’s potential to add over $116 billion to Australia’s economy, it advises against “clumsy or excessive regulation” that could hinder this growth. This perspective contrasts sharply with the concerns of creators who fear job displacement and a loss of income. Treasurer Jim Chalmers has adopted a stance of being “optimistic that AI can be a force for good, but I’m also realistic about the risks.”
Australia’s copyright law operates on a “fair dealing” regime, which is more restrictive than the “fair use” system in the US, with specific exceptions. Tech companies have argued that this difference puts Australia at a disadvantage in AI development, pushing for a TDM exception similar to those in the UK and Singapore. However, the UK recently rejected a similar push for a broad TDM exception.
The Labor government now faces a critical decision: whether to align with the Productivity Commission’s recommendations, potentially alienating the creative sector, or to uphold stronger copyright protections, which tech companies argue could stifle innovation and investment. The debate underscores a global tension between fostering technological advancement and protecting intellectual property rights in the age of AI.