Australian creators and media sectors rally in Canberra to advocate for licensing requirements for commercial AI training, amid ongoing debates over copyright protections and innovation balance.

Australia’s creative and media sectors assembled in Canberra this month to press for a licensing model that would require commercial AI developers to obtain permission before using Australian copyrighted works to train their systems. The gathering, held at Parliament House, brought together ministers, parliamentarians, officials and executives to deliberate how copyright should govern the rise of generative AI. (Sources: ABC, IT Brief).

Attorney-General Michelle Rowland and Senator Sarah Henderson opened the event, which organisers billed as a forum on policy choices for artificial intelligence and cultural industries. According to those involved, the conference united music, publishing, screen, television and news organisations that argued licensing offers a commercially viable route for AI firms to access creative content without eroding existing rights. (Sources: IT Brief, ABC).

The Canberra debate unfolded against a clear government position: in October 2025 Australia declined to introduce a broad text and data mining exception to the Copyright Act, a move that prevents AI developers from automatically using protected works for model training. The decision has been framed by officials and many creators as a way to balance innovation with the need for creators to be paid, and a working group has been established to explore alternative measures for AI-related challenges. (Sources: ABC, DundasLawyers, ACS, Marketing-Interactive).

Speakers at the event pointed to a growing roster of commercial agreements as evidence that licensing can scale across sectors. Delegates cited deals already announced between technology platforms and media owners in Australia and overseas as practical examples of how payment arrangements can be struck between rights holders and AI companies. At the same time some in the tech industry have warned the restrictions could complicate model development. (Sources: IT Brief, The Guardian).

"We didn't defeat piracy by turning off the internet. Ultimately, we prevailed because streamers built a better product than piracy. That's what we hope to do with AI," Jonathan Dworkin of Universal Music Group said in his address, urging the industry to develop lawful, competitive offerings. Rebecca Costello of The Guardian Australia and New Zealand warned of the economic consequences for journalism if reporting were assimilated into AI systems without compensation: "We invest everything in journalism. When that work is taken and used without compensation, the impact is fewer journalists, fewer newsrooms and less public interest journalism. No market operates when you can take something for free and then charge for it. Licensing is happening and it has to, because the alternative is the erosion of the journalism that feeds these models in the first place." (Sources: IT Brief).

Other contributors highlighted technical and cultural considerations, arguing that existing tools can support identification and licensing of works, while also stressing the need to safeguard distinctive Australian cultural material, including First Nations content. "We actually have the technology we need to license things properly, to protect content and find where everything is. We cannot fall into a homogenised experience of all of our creativity. Australia has something truly unique - a thousand generations of First Nations culture - and we have a responsibility to protect it," composer and creative technologist Charlie Chan said. Panelists also urged clearer market rules and safeguards to bolster public trust in AI. (Sources: IT Brief, ACS).

The Canberra event mirrored a wider international conversation about AI and copyright. Supporters of stronger licensing noted similar shifts in other jurisdictions where lawmakers have been cautious about creating broad training exemptions, while some AI firms have publicly expressed frustration at limits they say could hamper innovation and market entry. The tension between protecting creators and enabling technical progress remains central to the policy choices policymakers now face. (Sources: The Guardian, YouTube).

Source Reference Map

Inspired by headline at: [1]

Sources by paragraph: - Paragraph 1: [2], [3] - Paragraph 2: [1], [2] - Paragraph 3: [2], [4], [3] - Paragraph 4: [1], [5] - Paragraph 5: [1] - Paragraph 6: [1], [3] - Paragraph 7: [6], [7]

Source: Noah Wire Services

Verification / Sources

  • https://itbrief.com.au/story/australia-backs-ai-licensing-under-copyright-rules - Please view link - unable to able to access data
  • https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-27/labor-rules-out-ai-training-copyright-exceptions/105935740 - In October 2025, the Australian government ruled out introducing a 'text and data mining' exception to copyright law, ensuring that AI developers cannot use Australian creative works without permission. This decision was welcomed by the creative sector, which had expressed concerns over potential exploitation of their content by AI companies. The government emphasized its commitment to supporting innovation while protecting the rights of creators. A working group was established to explore other avenues for AI-related copyright challenges, focusing on fair compensation for creators.
  • https://ia.acs.org.au/article/2025/govt-rules-out-ai-copyright-exemption-for-tech-giants.html - The Australian government has definitively ruled out granting AI companies an exemption to use copyrighted content for training purposes. This decision aligns with the stance of the Australian Computer Society (ACS), which supports the protection of creators' rights. The ACS emphasized the importance of fair compensation for content creators and the need for AI companies to negotiate licenses for the use of copyrighted material. The move aims to balance technological advancement with the rights of Australian creators.
  • https://www.dundaslawyers.com.au/federal-gov-rules-out-copyright-text-and-data-mining-exception-for-ai/ - In October 2025, the Australian government announced it would not introduce a 'text and data mining' exception to the Copyright Act, ensuring that AI developers cannot freely use Australian creative works for training models. This decision was welcomed by the creative sector, which had expressed concerns over potential exploitation of their content by AI companies. The government emphasized its commitment to supporting innovation while protecting the rights of creators. A working group was established to explore other avenues for AI-related copyright challenges, focusing on fair compensation for creators.
  • https://www.marketing-interactive.com/australia-rules-out-ai-text-and-data-mining-exception-siding-with-creators-over-tech-giants - Australia's federal government has ruled out introducing a 'text and data mining' exception to copyright law, siding with creators over tech giants. This decision means AI developers will not be granted automatic rights to use copyrighted material, including articles, images, music, or video, to train large language models or other AI systems without permission. The government remains committed to supporting innovation while protecting the rights of creators, emphasizing the importance of fair compensation for content creators.
  • https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/oct/17/open-ai-breaks-ranks-with-tech-council-of-australia-over-copyright-restrictions - OpenAI has broken ranks with the Tech Council of Australia over copyright restrictions, declaring that its artificial intelligence models are 'going to be in Australia, one way or the other'. This statement highlights the ongoing debate between AI companies and the Australian government regarding the use of copyrighted material for AI training. The government's decision to rule out a 'text and data mining' exception to copyright law has been met with mixed reactions from the tech industry, with some companies expressing concerns over potential limitations on AI development.
  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyhSXKkwrtE - This video discusses Australia's decision to rule out allowing AI companies to freely use Australian creative works for training purposes. The move is seen as a significant win for creators, ensuring that their rights are protected and that they are fairly compensated for the use of their work in AI development. The video provides insights into the implications of this decision for the future of AI and the creative industry in Australia.

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first emerged. We've since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score: 8

Notes: The article references a recent event in Canberra on March 26, 2026, discussing AI licensing under copyright laws. However, similar discussions and decisions were reported in October 2025, such as the Australian government's ruling out of a text and data mining exception for AI companies. (abc.net.au) This suggests that while the event is recent, the topic has been under discussion for several months.

Quotes check

Score: 7

Notes: The article includes direct quotes from various individuals, including Attorney-General Michelle Rowland and industry representatives. However, these quotes are not independently verifiable through the provided sources. Without access to the original speeches or transcripts, the accuracy and context of these quotes cannot be fully confirmed.

Source reliability

Score: 6

Notes: The primary source, IT Brief Australia, is a technology news outlet. While it provides detailed coverage, its niche focus may limit its reach and influence compared to major news organisations. Additionally, the article relies on information from other sources, including ABC News and The Guardian, which are more established and reputable.

Plausibility check

Score: 7

Notes: The article discusses a recent event in Canberra regarding AI licensing under copyright laws, which aligns with previous reports on the topic. However, the lack of independently verifiable quotes and the reliance on a single source for the event details raise questions about the completeness and accuracy of the information presented.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM

Summary: The article reports on a recent event in Canberra regarding AI licensing under copyright laws. While the event is recent, similar discussions have been reported since October 2025. The article includes direct quotes that are not independently verifiable, and relies heavily on a single source, raising concerns about the completeness and accuracy of the information presented. Given these factors, the overall assessment is OPEN, indicating that further verification is needed before publishing.