Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA) and Phonographic Performance Company of Australia (PPCA) CEO Annabelle Herd has continued to fight for the rights of local creators, issuing a response to assertions made by the Co-Chairs of the Joint Parliamentary Committee for AI.
Launched recently, the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence is currently underway in Sydney, and is seeking to look at just what opportunities and risks AI presents in Australia.
However, Co-Chairs Chairs Jo Briskey and Jono Duniam appeared on live TV yesterday to assert that the current version of Australian copyright law is failing our artists, and that local creators will miss out on emerging AI opportunities if the law is not overhauled.
"The statement made by the Co-Chairs of the Parliamentary Committee is wrong," Herd said in response to the claims. "Moreover, it ignores substantial evidence provided to the Committee.
"Australian copyright law gives creators control. It is the only thing standing between major American AI companies and unchecked access to the world’s content right here from Australia."
Proof of this can be seen in ARIA's own submission and evidence presented to the Committee, wherein it lists 18 major global AI deals between technology companies and the music industry.
Since the submission, nine further deals have been made, with local record labels and artists – including Australian-headquartered companies – being represented in these deals.
“The deals being done now prove global licensing works," Herd added. "That is how artists and rightsholders retain control and negotiate terms including remuneration.
"Record labels and music publishers have also brought copyright infringement action against AI companies for copyright infringement in the US. That is how enforcement works, it occurs in the jurisdiction where the infringing copying occurs. We are not asking the Australian parliament to solve overseas piracy by AI companies.
She continued:
The Committee seems to have ignored this evidence and that of other rightsholder representatives to support the convenient argument that our law must be changed to suit AI companies, otherwise Australian artists will miss out.
Voluntary licensing is how creators will retain control and be remunerated when AI exploits their work for commercial gain. Australian and international record labels are already negotiating and signing AI licensing deals. It is early days, but the licensing market is developing at pace.
None of that is reflected in the Committee’s response.
The evidence is clear that this is not a market failure. It is a failure to acknowledge the market that already exists.
Why would AI companies do deals in Australia while they are confidently pressuring our Parliament to secure a change in our copyright law that means they won’t ever have to?
Herd's statement was also supported by the Australasian Music Publishers’ Association Limited (AMPAL), who noted that "having to ask permission isn't market failure".
"Voluntary AI licensing agreements are already being negotiated and concluded internationally," they explained. "The market is developing, not failing.
"Copyright gives music publishers and songwriters the right to decide how their work is used and to negotiate payment on agreed terms.
"The need to obtain permission is not a flaw in the system. It's the foundation of a functioning licensing market.
"Australia can support AI innovation without resorting to weakening the rights that make creative investment and licensing possible," they concluded.
Herd also issued a warning to the Committee last week, noting that new proposals designed to attract AI companies to train their models in Australia could put the work of local creatives at risk, and ultimately devastate the local industry.
"This concept that the status quo isn’t working is being used as an argument by AI companies to change our copyright law," she explained. You don’t address a systemic problem of mass piracy by changing the law to legalise that piracy on an ongoing basis.
"In Australia, we have a very clear system where, if you can’t rely on a fair dealing exception, you can’t copy. The law is very certain. It is very simple for these companies to come to us and say, ‘We’d like to license your content.’ They should come to the negotiating table, not to the Prime Minister’s office.
"ARIA and PPCA are not against these companies doing their frontier training in Australia," she added. "We understand why that is beneficial, but it should happen on our terms, not theirs.
"There is nothing less sovereign than rewriting our laws to suit foreign company commercial interests."
The Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence is expected to report on their findings in late November.
