Australian Musicians Demand PM Albanese Reject $50bn AI Copyright Deal Threatening Creative Work

'Don't kill music': Anthony Albanese's favourite bands beg PM to stop AI companies from stealing their work

A potential deal with the government would allow international tech companies to mine the creative work of Australian musicians. Some of the prime minister's favourite artists told the Guardian how they feel about it Big tech companies are asking for Australian copyright laws to be watered down, to allow them to scrape Australian output - including journalism, music and books - in order to improve their AI models. Guardian Australia this week reported on an industry proposal under which companies would commit more than $50bn in investment in datacentres and set up a $350m fund to compensate creatives in exchange for weaker copyright laws. Senator David Pocock has described it as the "ultimate dirty deal". The Albanese government has insisted it has no plans to weaken copyright protections, after ruling out the potential text and data mining exemption last year - but creatives are sounding the alarm. Loudest among them this week are musicians, some of whom discovered last month that their work was already being scraped. Albanese is known for his love of Australian music. Guardian Australia spoke to some of his favourite bands to hear what they had to say to him. Bernard Fanning from Powderfinger: 'Please do the right thing' In 2022, the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, gave former New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern a Powderfinger record during a diplomatic vinyl swap. He has also featured the band's music in playlists, as DJ Albo. It feels like a violation. We have always been very careful about where our music is placed, and this upends that consideration. Aside from that, it's bad manners. A robot could never write Flame Trees, Highway to Hell, Took The Children Away or Am I Not Pretty Enough? We have an important opportunity to put down a marker that says, "Our government is prepared to be on the side of Australian artists and storytellers", some of the very people that help shape our cultural identity. Humans should be telling our stories, ones that come from deep thinking about our experiences and how we process them, not from data aggregations. Anthony Albanese: you're an avowed lover of Australian music and have made it part of your identity as a public figure. You've spent most of your life fighting to relieve people of disadvantage. Any partial or wholesale waiving of our rights as copyright holders would put Australian artists at a massive disadvantage. At the absolute minimum, we should have the secure legal right to opt out of this horrible idea. Please do the right thing by our past, current and future artists. Lindy Morrison of the Go-Betweens: 'We need new laws' Cattle and Cane by the Go-Betweens was listed among Albanese's top 10 Australian songs of all time. The prime minister also featured the band when guest programming Rage in 2013 and the Go-Betweens have often featured in his DJ Albo playlists. I like what the drummer Clyde Stubblefield (James Brown) said in 2016 to the Philadelphia Inquirer: "I can dig that others try to do what I do, and am happy when people try to play what I play, but I do not appreciate not getting paid." I didn't write a single Go-Betweens song but I know AI has sampled 95 of them, and I'd be pissed off if my drum beat in Cattle and Cane was used anywhere without attribution or payment. From sampling (look to Milky sampling Streets of Your Town) to P2P filesharing, I've always cared about copyright infringement. Every time there's a new technological change, we need new laws. That's the reason the right of communication to cover infringements across the net was introduced into the Copyright Act. My beef goes further and is this: how will artists who self-release get paid for the use of the recordings? Janet English from Spiderbait: 'How is this fair?' Buy Me A Pony by Spiderbait was listed among Albanese's top 10 Australian songs of all time. One of the band's albums was also among the gifts Albanese presented to Ardern. As musicians we are appalled that our life's work has been stolen from us. We haven't given consent or been compensated, it's just been swiped. How is this fair? It's as if you walked on to a farm and stole all the crops. You can't just steal the output of an industry. Music is the cornerstone of Australian culture - our stories, our work, our passion. We want to keep telling our stories but, if our work gets stolen, we can't - and the industry dies. It's not just the musicians who are affected but everyone in the industry: roadies, engineers, radio stations, venues, festivals and more. And then there's the new bands coming through, writing the songs that will define our lives. Will there be an industry left for them? This isn't an anti-AI thing for us; we feel music is a unique cultural asset that needs protection and fair treatment. Tech companies are taking the piss. We appeal to the Australian government: don't let the lifeblood of our culture be ripped off by bullies with deep pockets. To Albo: go and get us a fair deal. Don't kill music in Australia. Hannah Joy from Middle Kids: 'AI cannot perform live' Albanese voted for the Blessings by Middle Kids in the 2024 Hottest 100; the band also featured as his #3 most-played artist on his 2025 Spotify Wrapped. I've always thought of Australia as an artist-friendly country, and our band has been fortunate to have had meaningful support. We are at a time where we need to decide what kind of culture we want to have in Australia moving forward. Protecting artists and their livelihoods is a part of this not only because of their artistic contributions but because of how they shape spaces and places. Live performances provide important connection and a way to be together, which is something we need more than ever in order to keep community alive. AI cannot perform live. If artists can no longer be artists because of their work being scraped by AI, it will come at a great cost to Australian culture. We're grateful for the government's call to not change the Copyright Act, and really implore them to hold this position. Andrew Cox of the Fauves: 'Great music will always exist on the margins' Dogs are the Best People by the Fauves was listed among Albanese's top 10 Australian songs of all time. In an ABC radio interview, he said the song reminded him of his "own little friend", Toto the cavoodle. I recently searched and found that a large chunk of the Fauves' catalogue had been scraped to train AI models. I was kind of flattered, although it's doubtful the scraper is discriminating, so I'm kidding myself there. The Fauves have spent 40 years unsuccessfully trying to make people like our music. Maybe AI will do a better job? I'm not that fussed if it wants to try. I think an artist's job is to sit outside of the conventional economy, to expect to be exploited and ripped off. How else can they stay angry? Historically, artists have always been poor and there's something romantic about that. Getting rich is for dull tech bros and boring investment bankers. If I turn on the radio, most stuff already sounds like it was written by AI. Great music will always exist on the margins for those who want to seek it out. For everyone else, maybe it doesn't matter whether their favourite song was written by AI or a human? I'm not sure Mr Albanese knows much about the Fauves apart from the one song he likes. If I could speak to him, I'd ask him to stop native forest logging and increase the foreign aid budget.

Creatives sound alarm on copyright as Pocock calls $50bn datacentre proposal 'ultimate dirty deal'

Proposal has been put to cabinet to allow AI companies to mine content, in exchange for investment and $350m fund to compensate artists, sources say Creatives are demanding fresh assurances from the Albanese government that it won't water down copyright laws under a potential deal with tech giants to attract more than $50bn worth of datacentre investment in exchange for a $350m-a-year fund for artists. Guardian Australia has been told an industry proposal has been presented to cabinet that would grant AI companies special exemptions to mine creative content. In exchange, the companies would bankroll the artists' fund and commit more than $50bn worth of investment in datacentres. The independent senator David Pocock said the proposal was the "ultimate dirty deal" as he demanded the government categorically rule it out. The government insisted it had no plans to weaken copyright protections. The potential adoption of a text and data mining exemption would represent a major reversal from the federal government, which last year ruled it out after criticism from artists, authors and media groups. Amid fears the government could capitulate to big tech, a delegation of creatives staged a press conference in parliament house on Wednesday to urge the government to hold the line. "The idea that copyright law should be watered down or chiselled away at to provide a freebie or a handout to gigantic multinational, multi-billion dollar companies to train their AI models makes absolutely no sense to me," said Paul Dempsey, the lead of singer of Something for Kate. "I simply don't get it." The author Anna Funder described herself as a "victim of crime", citing the ease with which big technology had made money from her books. "My books that I've lived off for 30 years, have all been hoovered up in many editions, in many countries, in many languages by big tech, broken down for parts and used for them to make money," she said. Pocock last week revealed he had been provided with information showing Anthony Albanese was preparing to announce a plan on or about 15 July, which may offer expedited approvals and investment for new datacentres. Albanese confirmed last week he would deliver a major speech in July about the government's approach on AI. He met with representatives of Anthropic last week. Guardian Australia has been told competing cabinet submissions about the plan are in train, with the Department of Industry, Science and Resources and the Attorney-General's Department split over the best approach. The second option involves a possible licensing extension to cover AI model developments. The former industry minister Ed Husic had argued for new AI guardrails and consideration of major new laws, but he was dumped from cabinet in 2025. Tim Ayres, his successor in the portfolio, is in favour of a lighter touch approach. The government rejected Pocock's claims as inaccurate and insisted its position on a text and data mining exemption had not changed. But Pocock was adamant the information was correct. "What cabinet is considering is the ultimate dirty deal, selling out Australian musicians, writers, authors and other creatives in return for an eye-wateringly large investment in AI data centres, which, as we know, are currently wildly unregulated in this country," he said in a speech to parliament on Wednesday. "The government has criticised me a lot, but has not denied it, because it is true. The government needs to get up in this place and categorically rule out any carve-out, any exemption, any watering down of copyright exemptions now and into the future. "To sell out Australian creatives would be a reckless act." In a statement to Guardian Australia on Wednesday, a spokesperson for the attorney general, Michelle Rowland, said the government had "repeatedly said that there are no plans to weaken copyright protections when it comes to AI". "We are committed to ensuring that Australia has a fit-for-purpose copyright framework that protects and supports Australia's creative and media industries while unlocking AI innovation," the spokesperson said. The government is encouraging the tech giants and creatives to work together to negotiate deals to "support innovation while ensuring creators are compensated". The musician Holly Rankin, whose stage name is Jack River, said artists were prepared to make deals. "To the government we say, 'don't back down, do not sign our rights away', and to big tech we say 'ask us, get permission, pay us, we are here ready to do deals with you'," she said. Guardian Australia is among the media companies supporting the campaign to safeguard copyright laws.

Jessica Mauboy pleads with Albo not to 'sell out' Aussie culture

Jessica Mauboy has issued a public plea to Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese not to weaken Australia's copyright laws, amid fears artificial intelligence companies could soon be given greater access to Australian music and creative works. The 36-year-old singer and actress spoke to NewsWire ahead of a major copyright campaign event in Canberra on Wednesday, where some of Australia's biggest names in music, publishing and the arts gathered to call on the Federal Government to preserve existing copyright protections. Mauboy said the prospect of big tech companies using her music without permission was "unimaginable". "The idea that big tech might get a free pass to train AI on my music without my consent is unimaginable," Mauboy said. The Darwin-based singer, who released music independently for the first time this year, said the move had made her appreciate the importance of creative ownership more than ever. "The Albanese government must not sell out Australian culture and take away our right to choose how our work is used," she said. Her comments come just weeks after The Atlantic reported that millions of songs, including Australian and New Zealand musical works, had allegedly been included in four massive datasets circulating within the AI development community. Among the local artists reportedly affected were Midnight Oil, Cold Chisel, Sia, Crowded House, Split Enz, INXS, Kylie Minogue, Christine Anu and Nick Cave. Current Australian copyright law requires AI companies to obtain permission before using copyrighted material to train their models. However, concerns were reignited last week after independent senator David Pocock claimed a whistleblower had told him the Albanese Government was considering a copyright carve-out for AI in return for investment in Australia's data centre infrastructure. Speaking on Sky News, the ACT senator said cabinet was considering two possible approaches to AI and copyright. Under one option, AI companies such as OpenAI and Anthropic could receive a "text and data mining exemption", allowing them to train AI models using copyrighted material without first obtaining permission. "The other option is some sort of extension of copyright where there's a licensing arrangement which I think, depending on how it's done, artists and others could come around to it if it was on fair terms and you could actually negotiate your copyright as well," he said. The event at Mural Hall in Parliament House was attended by representatives from the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA), the Australasian Performing Right Association (APRA AMCOS), and the Australasian Music Publishers Association Limited (AMPAL), alongside creatives including First Nations musician William Barton, children's author Andy Griffiths and singer-songwriter Mahalia Barnes, to name a few. Outside Parliament House, AMPAL chief executive Damian Rinaldi said Australia's existing copyright system was already working. "If AI companies want to use music, they need permission, they need a licence and they need to pay fairly. Licensing is already working. "Australia should not weaken copyright to solve a problem the market is already solving." Meanwhile, the Albanese Government has denied it is considering any changes that would weaken Australia's copyright laws. In a statement to the Guardian last week, a spokesperson for Industry Minister Tim Ayres described Senator Pocock's claims as "inaccurate". "The government has ruled out a text and data mining exception. Our position has not changed," they said.