{"id":267556,"date":"2025-10-27T13:00:50","date_gmt":"2025-10-27T02:00:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.russh.com\/?p=267556"},"modified":"2025-10-27T13:00:50","modified_gmt":"2025-10-27T02:00:50","slug":"tdm-ai-copyright-australia-explained","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.russh.com\/tdm-ai-copyright-australia-explained\/","title":{"rendered":"Creative works can no longer be mined by AI without consent in Australia"},"content":{"rendered":"

A songwriter might spend years perfecting a melody. A filmmaker will spend hours trying to perfectly capture a fleeting moment of light. A First Nations artist<\/a> will channel generations of cultural knowledge into a single piece. These acts of creation are deeply human, fragile, and invaluable. Yet in the digital age, they are also data \u2013 scrapable, replicable, and, in the eyes of some tech companies, freely mineable.<\/p>\n

It’s this conundrum that sits at the heart of a landmark decision made overnight. The Albanese Government has announced that it will not<\/strong><\/span> introduce a Text and Data Mining (TDM) exception into Australian copyright law. Effectively, the Australian government have said: creative works are not raw material for algorithms without consent. And that\u2019s a stance worth unpacking.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Why did the Government reject a TDM exception?<\/h3>\n

Their position is straightforward: copyright is not a barrier to progress, but a foundation of both creative and digital economies.<\/p>\n

Attorney-General Michelle Rowland\u2019s refusal to introduce the exception is being hailed by the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA) and the Phonographic Performance Company of Australia (PPCA) as a turning point.<\/p>\n

The decision affirms that creators retain the right to decide how their work is used\u2014and that consent, control, and compensation remain central. It\u2019s not just about protecting today\u2019s artists but also safeguarding the cultural heritage of First Nations communities, which could otherwise be exploited by unchecked AI systems.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Does copyright really hold back AI innovation?<\/h3>\n

Tech companies argue that exceptions are necessary for AI research to thrive. But is that true? Australia\u2019s current licensing systems suggest otherwise. They already enable deals between artists and AI firms that want to use content ethically. In fact, Annabelle Herd, CEO of ARIA and PPCA<\/a>, points out that a growing number of AI companies are striking such agreements without needing loopholes.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
View this post on Instagram<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

A post shared by APRA AMCOS (@apraamcos)<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n