The effects of artificial intelligence (AI) on intellectual property rights have ignited a fiery discussion on the Hill in Canberra. This conversation is having particular impact on the creative community.
What you need to know
Industry experts, artists, and legal professionals are weighing in. They are especially concerned with the long-term impacts AI technologies might have on copyright laws, which advocates argue haven’t kept pace with rapid technological developments. The Australian government has come under fire for possibly amending the Copyright Act, which would weaken protections for creators.
Mr. Dave Lemphers argues for even stricter copyright enforcement. He argued that many foreign AI models likely violated key copyright provisions in doing so during their training. He cautioned that if this slips through the cracks, it will have devastating consequences for Australian creators. He called on the government to establish new protective rules for copyright, including transparent commission structures built into technology.
Legal Framework and AI Challenges
Associate Professor Kimberlee Weatherall is an internationally recognised legal scholar. She underscored that existing copyright laws do a poor job of responding to the threats posed by AI. She stated, “We’ve barely revised our laws for the digital environment,” pointing out that the last major update occurred approximately twenty years ago. The legislative process and its slow pace of change can take exploitative leaps forward that artists are then left to face without recourse.
The Productivity Commission recently recommended the introduction of an exception for text and data mining to the Copyright Act. This proposal has incited fury from all corners of the creative and media sectors. Critics counter, claiming that these exemptions put artists’ livelihoods at risk. They worry that if they let others use their works without sufficient recompense they may jeopardize their livelihoods.
“The main risk is the immediate one that is the threat to artists’ livelihoods,” – Louise Buckingham
Buckingham claimed that even a limited data mining exemption would dramatically reduce income earned by artists. She had a simple but powerful message — creators deserve permission, payment, and the ability to prosper. Without them, the whole system that enables their work to flourish would soon fall apart.
Notable Incidents and Artist Perspectives
The problem became personal for Gunai writer Kirli Saunders when she recently learned that Meta had utilized her book “Bindi” to train its AI model. She had never signed off on this. Saunders expressed her frustration, stating, “It was really frustrating having a large tech company steal my work and provide no apology or explanation.” This event highlights the pressing need for more precise guidance on the permissible scope of AI engagement with intellectual property.
Lemphers brought the discussion back to the need for strong copyright protections, saying tech companies shouldn’t be able to take advantage of loopholes that already exist. “You could easily build in commission structures and royalty structures into your technology,” he remarked. He continued emphasizing that the unwillingness to provide this is an indication of a lack of concern for artists’ rights.
Future Directions and Industry Insights
As discussions around AI and copyright continue, industry leaders are calling for Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) rights to be central in deliberations about regulations governing AI technologies. Additionally, Lemphers emphasized that Australian law requires a higher standard of proof and transparency when it comes to selling and licensing technology.
Enforcing these laws against some of the Silicon Valley giants would run into practical challenges, pointed out Professor Weatherall. “It’s very difficult to sue a big company that’s based overseas. It’s hard to serve them, to get them to court,” she continued.
As Australia continues to navigate the intersection of AI and intellectual property, it’s hard to say what the future holds. Companies such as Maincode are already training AI models that they say will be “Australia’s answer to Chat GPT.” As the development of these technologies continues, the current conversation around copyright protections will surely shape their future.
