Federal Government Affirms Copyright Protections for Australian Creative Content

The federal government has delivered a strong message to the creative community: Australian-copyrighted material remains protected even as artificial intelligence applications proliferate. On 27 October 2025, Attorney-General Michelle Rowland confirmed that the government will not introduce a so-called “text and data mining” (TDM) exemption to the Copyright Act 1968 that would allow AI developers to freely train their tools on Australian creative works without permission or payment.

This decision follows a report by the Productivity Commission earlier in the year, which proposed such an exemption as a way to help Australia keep pace with digital innovation. Many representatives of the arts, cultural and creative industries argued that the proposal would undermine creators’ rights and the value of Australian-authored work.

In announcing the outcome, the Attorney-General emphasised that creators must continue to enjoy the right to licence their work, to be remunerated for its use, and to participate in the shaping of our national cultural environment. “There is a body of work to do around what the copyright environment looks like in the AI world,” Rowland said, “but we are making it very clear that we will not be entertaining a text and data mining exception.”

Industry bodies representing writers, illustrators, publishers and musicians welcomed the decision. The Australian Society of Authors described it as a “watershed moment … that creators should be paid for their work.” The Australian Publishers Association noted that greater clarity around licensing for AI usage will help investment in Australian-authored content.

What this means for the regional creative sector in the Murray region (and beyond):

• Creators, arts organisations and cultural projects can continue to rely on the current copyright framework when negotiating rights, licences and collaborations around AI usage.
• As AI tools increasingly touch on arts, heritage, performance and media, there is now a clearer policy basis to say: “If my work is used in AI training, I should have a say and be remunerated.”
• With the government signalling a forthcoming review of licensing arrangements and transparency standards for AI training, regional artists and organisations should engage in policy consultations and monitor how changes may affect project design, commissioning, and rights agreements.

For Murray Arts and the communities we support, the ruling offers assurance that the value of local creative work remains acknowledged and protected in the AI-age. We will continue to keep you informed of developments in AI, copyright, licensing and creative rights, and how they may affect individual practitioners, arts organisations, and regional cultural ecosystems.