ArtistDirect News
Australian Creatives Rally at Parliament House to Push AI Licensing Reforms
On July 1 2026, a diverse coalition of Australian writers, musicians, and industry leaders converged on Parliament House in Canberra, demanding that the Albanese Government enforce the country’s existing copyright framework and negotiate fair licensing agreements with artificial‑intelligence (AI) firms.
The delegation boasted a star‑studded lineup that included William Barton, Paul Dempsey, Warren H. Williams, Anna Funder, Mahalia Barnes, John Collins, Andy Griffiths, KLP, Francois Tetaz, Mark Seymour, and Holly Rankin of Jack River. Representatives from the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA), Australasian Performing Right Association Ltd (APRA), Australasian Mechanical Copyright Owners Society (AMCOS), Australian Society of Authors, Australian Writers’ Guild, Australian Publishers Association, Mushroom Group, Australian Music Publishers Association Ltd, Gyro, Association of Artist Managers, Copyright Agency, and Free TV Australia also joined the delegation.
Lucy Hayward of the Australian Society of Authors cut to the chase: “Copyright is simple. If you want to use someone’s work, you need permission. It also protects authors’ livelihoods.” She lambasted tech giants for lobbying the government while offering only “chump change” for creative works, labeling the practice a form of wage theft.
ARIA chief executive Annabelle Herd framed the gathering as a united front across the creative and media industries. “We are standing at Parliament House today to ask the Government to hold the line it drew in October and let the licensing market function as it should,” she said. Herd emphasized that a sophisticated licensing system already exists to ensure creators receive payment for the online use of their music, and that the industry seeks to replicate this model with AI companies.
Mahalia Barnes, the singer‑songwriter, underscored the cultural significance of safeguarding artistic expression. “This is not just data. This is truly art. It is the essence of our nation,” she declared. Barnes warned that technology cannot replace the human element that gives art its soul.
The meeting follows recent milestones in Australian copyright law. In April 2026, the Albanese Government passed reforms that clarified legal certainty for orphan works. The government also reiterated that it will not introduce a text‑and‑data‑mining exception for AI training—a stance reaffirmed in a 2025 press release. Industry groups such as ARIA and APRA welcomed the Productivity Commission’s findings on AI licensing, noting that the current legal framework already provides tools for negotiating fair agreements.
The Australian Copyright Act 1968, amended in 2004 to extend protection to 70 years after an author’s death, remains the backbone of the country’s regime. While the Act does not contain a specific AI training exception, standard copyright principles apply, meaning that using copyrighted works to train AI models without permission can constitute infringement.
The creatives’ demand is for the government to leverage its influence to bring AI companies to the negotiating table, ensuring that licensing agreements mirror those already in place for music, books, and other creative outputs. They argue that without such agreements, AI firms could exploit Australian works without compensating rights holders.
Industry bodies have voiced strong support for the initiative. The Australian Publishers Association and the Australian Writers’ Guild publicly back the call for tighter protections, while Free TV Australia—operating a network of community television stations—joined the delegation, highlighting AI’s broader impact across media sectors.
The Albanese Government has indicated that it is consulting on potential updates to copyright law but has yet to announce new legislation specifically addressing AI. Recent statements suggest a cautious approach, emphasizing that any changes must balance the interests of creators, consumers, and technology developers.
The Parliament House rally marks a coordinated effort by artists and industry groups to shape policy on AI licensing. While the government has not yet responded to the delegation’s demands, the event has amplified the growing tension between creative industries and AI developers over the use of copyrighted material.
In the coming months, Australian Parliament is expected to review the government’s stance on AI licensing. The outcome of these discussions will determine how Australian creators are compensated for the use of their works by AI companies and could set a precedent for other jurisdictions grappling with similar issues.
The meeting concluded with the delegation affirming its commitment to engaging with the government and industry stakeholders to secure fair licensing arrangements for Australian creative works.
The delegation boasted a star‑studded lineup that included William Barton, Paul Dempsey, Warren H. Williams, Anna Funder, Mahalia Barnes, John Collins, Andy Griffiths, KLP, Francois Tetaz, Mark Seymour, and Holly Rankin of Jack River. Representatives from the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA), Australasian Performing Right Association Ltd (APRA), Australasian Mechanical Copyright Owners Society (AMCOS), Australian Society of Authors, Australian Writers’ Guild, Australian Publishers Association, Mushroom Group, Australian Music Publishers Association Ltd, Gyro, Association of Artist Managers, Copyright Agency, and Free TV Australia also joined the delegation.
Lucy Hayward of the Australian Society of Authors cut to the chase: “Copyright is simple. If you want to use someone’s work, you need permission. It also protects authors’ livelihoods.” She lambasted tech giants for lobbying the government while offering only “chump change” for creative works, labeling the practice a form of wage theft.
ARIA chief executive Annabelle Herd framed the gathering as a united front across the creative and media industries. “We are standing at Parliament House today to ask the Government to hold the line it drew in October and let the licensing market function as it should,” she said. Herd emphasized that a sophisticated licensing system already exists to ensure creators receive payment for the online use of their music, and that the industry seeks to replicate this model with AI companies.
Mahalia Barnes, the singer‑songwriter, underscored the cultural significance of safeguarding artistic expression. “This is not just data. This is truly art. It is the essence of our nation,” she declared. Barnes warned that technology cannot replace the human element that gives art its soul.
The meeting follows recent milestones in Australian copyright law. In April 2026, the Albanese Government passed reforms that clarified legal certainty for orphan works. The government also reiterated that it will not introduce a text‑and‑data‑mining exception for AI training—a stance reaffirmed in a 2025 press release. Industry groups such as ARIA and APRA welcomed the Productivity Commission’s findings on AI licensing, noting that the current legal framework already provides tools for negotiating fair agreements.
The Australian Copyright Act 1968, amended in 2004 to extend protection to 70 years after an author’s death, remains the backbone of the country’s regime. While the Act does not contain a specific AI training exception, standard copyright principles apply, meaning that using copyrighted works to train AI models without permission can constitute infringement.
The creatives’ demand is for the government to leverage its influence to bring AI companies to the negotiating table, ensuring that licensing agreements mirror those already in place for music, books, and other creative outputs. They argue that without such agreements, AI firms could exploit Australian works without compensating rights holders.
Industry bodies have voiced strong support for the initiative. The Australian Publishers Association and the Australian Writers’ Guild publicly back the call for tighter protections, while Free TV Australia—operating a network of community television stations—joined the delegation, highlighting AI’s broader impact across media sectors.
The Albanese Government has indicated that it is consulting on potential updates to copyright law but has yet to announce new legislation specifically addressing AI. Recent statements suggest a cautious approach, emphasizing that any changes must balance the interests of creators, consumers, and technology developers.
The Parliament House rally marks a coordinated effort by artists and industry groups to shape policy on AI licensing. While the government has not yet responded to the delegation’s demands, the event has amplified the growing tension between creative industries and AI developers over the use of copyrighted material.
In the coming months, Australian Parliament is expected to review the government’s stance on AI licensing. The outcome of these discussions will determine how Australian creators are compensated for the use of their works by AI companies and could set a precedent for other jurisdictions grappling with similar issues.
The meeting concluded with the delegation affirming its commitment to engaging with the government and industry stakeholders to secure fair licensing arrangements for Australian creative works.