Sophie Scamps (Mackellar, Independent) | Link to this | Hansard source

Right now, we are at a critical crossroad for Australia's creative arts industry, one that may deeply harm this invaluable sector. At the recent AI summit in Sydney, the chair of the Tech Council of Australia, Scott Farquhar, called for copyright reform to encourage AI investment. He claimed it is impossible to train an AI model in Australia while doing deals with rights holders. However, in response, the Australian Recording Industry Association rightly described that claim as nonsense. Around the world, AI companies are already striking licensing agreements with record labels, publishers and creators. The message from Australia's creative sector is absolutely clear: tech companies do not need a special carve-out from the Copyright Act. They need a licence. Music, film publishing and broadcasting already operate on licensed use of content at scale.

The Copyright Act provides a clear and workable framework. Copyright is not the enemy of innovation; it is what allows creators to earn a living from their talent and their work. Yet we now hear reports that the federal government is considering a cabinet proposal to introduce a text and data mining exception into Australian copyright law. Such an exception would allow AI companies to train on copyrighted works without asking permission from the artist, writer, musician, filmmaker, journalist, performer, broadcaster, publisher or rights holder. The Australian creative and media industries do not support any weakening of copyright law. Weakening copyright would risk cutting Australian creators out of the global AI market altogether.

This proposal is also reportedly linked to discussions with major AI tech firms about data centre investment in Australia. Investment must never come at the cost of Australian rights. The Albanese government must not sell out Australians to big tech. In October 2025, the government ruled out a text and data mining exception, and it must stick to its word. Backtracking now would amount to legalising the wholesale scraping of creative content—not just Australian content but global content. Many would rightly call that theft.

We're also hearing about a proposed creator fund. It's absolutely clear the Australian creative sector will not support a fund in exchange for their rights. Such a fund would strip creators of the ability to decide how their work is used and remove their capacity to negotiate its value. It would extinguish the worth of Australian content, including our media, our broadcast rights and First Nations cultural expression, with the stroke of a pen. This is not a fair compromise. It is a concept designed by big tech to make the mass use of content legal without consent.

The stakes are extremely high. Australia's creative industries contribute more than $60 billion to our economy and employ hundreds of thousands of people. But, even more vitally, the creative industries generate a genuine expression of our culture and what it means to be Australian. At the same time, our AI sector is growing strongly under existing copyright settings. We do not need to choose between innovation and integrity; we can have both. So I call on the government to guarantee three principles: first, consent—creators must have the right to decide if their work is used; second, credit—their contribution must be acknowledged; and, third, compensation—if AI companies profit, creators must be paid. We also need transparency, enforceable safeguards and strong protections for First Nations cultural and intellectual property. Australian creators are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for fairness. AI must be built on respect for the people whose creativity makes it possible.