Weakening AI copyright law will spell ‘disaster for creativity’, global music body warns Albanese
News Source
•Sun, 08 Nov 2026 14:00:43 GMT
📰 What Happened
The global body for the recorded music industry has warned Australia against weakening copyright law for AI companies. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry says the plan would be "ridiculous and dangerous". Its chief executive, Victoria Oakley, called it a disaster for creativity. The warning comes as the Albanese government works on a wider set of AI policies.
AI companies have asked for looser rules so they can train their models on Australian material. Some say licensing deals under current law are too hard to strike. Anthropic has suggested an opt-out model, where it could use content unless the owner objects. The attorney general says any change must give creators real control and fair pay.
🔍 The Backstory
Copyright gives creators the right to say who can copy their work. AI models learn by scanning huge amounts of text, images and music, much of it taken from the internet. Record labels argue that training on songs is copying, and that artists should be paid. They point out that labels have already signed many deals with smaller AI firms, so licensing can work.
The music industry has fought this battle before, over file sharing and streaming. Oakley said other countries have rejected the same requests from AI companies. She fears that if Australia gives in, other nations may follow.
🎯 Why It Matters
If AI firms can use songs, books and art for free, the people who make them lose income. Australia's rules could set an example for other countries.
The global body for the recorded music industry has warned Australia against weakening copyright law for AI companies. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry says the plan would be "ridiculous and dangerous". Its chief executive, Victoria Oakley, called it a disaster for creativity. The warning comes as the Albanese government works on a wider set of AI policies.
AI companies have asked for looser rules so they can train their models on Australian material. Some say licensing deals under current law are too hard to strike. Anthropic has suggested an opt-out model, where it could use content unless the owner objects. The attorney general says any change must give creators real control and fair pay.
Copyright gives creators the right to say who can copy their work. AI models learn by scanning huge amounts of text, images and music, much of it taken from the internet. Record labels argue that training on songs is copying, and that artists should be paid. They point out that labels have already signed many deals with smaller AI firms, so licensing can work.
The music industry has fought this battle before, over file sharing and streaming. Oakley said other countries have rejected the same requests from AI companies. She fears that if Australia gives in, other nations may follow.
If AI firms can use songs, books and art for free, the people who make them lose income. Australia's rules could set an example for other countries.