AI companies want to water down Australia’s copyright laws. Artists are outraged, Labor is split | AI (artificial intelligence)

When Anna Funder appeared before a group of journalists in Parliament House earlier this month, she introduced herself not only as a writer but also as a “victim of crime”.

The Stasiland author was using this analogy to show how technology companies were blatantly “sweeping” his literary works for their own gain.

Funder was also underlining the importance of copyright laws in providing at least some layer of protection to Australians whose livelihoods depend on the original content they produce.

Writers, artists, musicians, and media organizations were reassured last year that these laws would not be diluted when the federal government refused to grant a legal exemption for AI companies to mine content to train large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude.

But sustained lobbying by tech giants and a whistleblower’s tip to independent senator David Pocock has sparked fears that the Albanian government may renege on its word; even though he insists he won’t.

Stoush exposed divisions within the Labor Party over how to respond to AI and raised questions about how far the government should lean on big tech (if at all) to capture the supposed riches of the data center boom.

Ministers were divided

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is expected to make a major speech on Wednesday about the government’s plans to regulate and exploit emerging technology.

Having abandoned former industry minister Ed Husic’s vision of dedicated AI action in favor of a hands-off approach to regulation, the government is reportedly ready to return to a newer approach. interventionist strategy.

No concrete announcement regarding changes to copyright laws is expected in Albanese’s speech; Guardian Australia was told it would be a vision statement rather than a detailed policy announcement.

Senior Labor sources say ministers are divided on progress on copyright reform, delaying resolution.

Industry minister Tim Ayres and deputy digital economy minister Andrew Charlton are the most enthusiastic about attracting AI investment, while copyright attorney general Michelle Rowland and arts minister Tony Burke are determined to protect the rights of creators.

The Prime Minister sought to reassure creators last week when asked if copyright protections were at risk, citing the news bargaining incentive as evidence of Labour’s “strong track record” in protecting local content producers.

“These are complex issues, we’re trying to work through that with industry. But I think my government has a strong track record of supporting people, firstly, to have control over the things they create, and secondly, if things are being used, if they’re paid for, if they’re compensated appropriately for that,” the Prime Minister said.

‘The biggest dirty deal’

The government has insisted it has no plans to grant a “text and data mining” exemption that would allow AI companies to mine content in Australia to train their models without breaching copyright laws.

Scott Farquhar, president of the Australian Technology Council and co-founder of Atlassian, appealed directly to this regulation last July, claiming that “fixing this one thing could unlock billions of dollars of foreign investment”.

The Productivity Commission floated the exemption idea in a report a few weeks later, sparking a furious backlash from the creative industry which eventually led to Rowland canceling the proposal in October.

The attorney general immediately began new consultations with creators, media and technology companies on other options for modernizing copyright laws, including a paid licensing model for artificial intelligence.

The government’s publicly stated preference is for tech firms to negotiate deals with creators to pay for the use of their content.

But the timeframe for a solution remains unclear, leaving the tech industry and creators in the dark.

The creative sector, Pocock and the Greens have feared that the “text and data mining” option could be revived in recent weeks as the Albanian government invests more in data centres.

In late June, Pocock’s office was tipped off to an industry push for at least $50 billion in data center investment and royalty sharing in exchange for contributions to a fund supposedly worth $350 million a year for creators.

The ACT independent senator described the proposal put to ministers as the “ultimate dirty deal” and demanded Labor reject it immediately.

“Selling Australian creators would be reckless. Selling Australian creators in data centers for several hundred billion dollars, increasing GDP, would be reckless,” Pocock told the Senate on July 1.

The federal government flatly rejected Pocock’s claims as false and reiterated that it had no plans to weaken copyright laws.

on tuesday, Australian Financial Review Anthropic is reportedly pushing for a deal along Pocock’s claims as part of a plan to make Australia its second home outside the US.

Antropik, CEO, Dario AmodeiAlbanese, who signed a memorandum of understanding with the federal government after meeting with Albanese in April, contacted him for comment.

Industry and government sources who spoke to the Guardian Australian on condition of anonymity poured cold water on any such deal with Anthropic or other companies.

But Guardian Australia understands the government has been told fringe AI companies see copyright laws as a “main obstacle” to investing in training their models.

‘We have bargaining power here’

Australia is seen as an ideal host for data centres, as a safe, politically stable country with access to land and renewable energy.

However, multinational technology giants are preparing to invest elsewhere in this situation that has turned into a global arms race.

Husic, who is currently on the bench, says the Australian government has leverage and should not give in to their demands.

“In the best traditions of late-night TV infomercials, we are under pressure from US tech that if we don’t sign up for these data center deals now, we’re missing a huge opportunity,” Husic says.

“Impulse purchases are often regretted, and our government needs to take some time to remember that we have negotiating power here and the ability to set the terms.”

The federal government has set “expectations” for data center developers, including securing additional green energy and covering their share of transmission and distribution costs.

Husic wants more restrictions, including a ban on new centers on land designated for housing.

The Labor MP has previously suggested a moratorium may be necessary if the data center “mania” makes it harder to meet the country’s housebuilding targets.

Our other colleagues disagree.

A Labor MP says opposition to data centers is akin to “acrimony” and the federal government must create consistent rules across the country to ensure Australia benefits from the global investment race.

The MP argues that Australia has not seen widespread protests against data center operation and construction as seen in the US.

Australian Data Centers CEO Belinda Dennett says the country has “all the makings” to be an attractive hub for AI but “policy certainty” is critical to securing that investment.

“We support the principles of the government’s data center expectations, but we need to understand how they will be implemented and how they will work with state and local government requirements,” he says.

Opinion polling shows Australians are divided on how they view AI.

A Guardian Essential poll conducted in May found that 36 percent of voters thought AI posed more risk than opportunity, while 41 percent viewed risk and opportunity in the same way. Only 22% think AI poses more opportunities than risks.

‘This would be a betrayal’

Charlton is leading the government’s AI plans; This is often a major policy responsibility for a junior minister who is only in his fourth year in parliament.

Kevin Rudd’s former chief economic adviser is regarded as one of Labour’s rising stars and its sharpest and most business-savvy minds, having made a personal fortune after founding and selling boutique consultancy AlphaBeta Advisors.

The Parramatta MP’s close ties to the tech world make him uniquely qualified to understand the risks and opportunities of artificial intelligence. Some of his colleagues believe he is too pro-technology, which clouds his perspective and priorities.

Charlton has sought to position himself as a centrist in the data center debate, neither a supporter nor an alarmist.

In a speech on June 10, he argued that Australia should not “blindly accept or reject” investment offered by tech giants.

“Australia must actively determine the conditions under which this investment will occur, consistent with our values ​​and consistent with our long-term interests,” he told the Sydney Institute.

When it comes to setting terms, the creators have made it clear that giving up copyright protections should not be on the table.

“The government has previously said it will not allow text and data mining exemptions,” said Green’s communications spokeswoman, Sarah Hanson-Young, who chairs the parliamentary inquiry into data centres.

“But anything that quacks like that, moves like that, would be treason.”