The Australian Writers’ Guild (AWG) and Australian Writers’ Guild Authorship Collecting Society (AWGACS) have rejected the suggestion that a Text and Data Mining (TDM) Exception for the training of AI models be considered by the government, and expressed disappointment at the Productivity Commission’s interim report.
The report “Harnessing data and digital technology” seeks feedback on a “TDM exception” to the Copyright Act, to allow ‘training’ of AI models on copyrighted works. Despite the interim report saying that such an exception would not be a blank cheque, writers are skeptical.
“The Productivity Commissioner has asked, ‘Are our laws fit for purpose with AI?’ but the real question is, why should we change our laws to make things easier for foreign big tech, instead of making things better for Australian workers, people who actually produce things in Australia?” said AWG and AWGACS CEO Claire Pullen.
“The Productivity Commission has conceded that large AI models have already been trained on copyrighted materials owned by Australians. It should be recommending tech companies follow Australian law and stop stealing from creative workers, who are responsible for an industry that contributes over $60 billion to our economy.”
Pullen notes there is a particularly acute risk to First Nations works, and any proposed TDM exception would fly in the face of the Productivity Commission’s own recommendations on fake First Nations art. Publicly available generative AI tools can be made to generate counterfeits, without regard to cultural protocols, community consent, or remuneration.
Tech companies operating Large Language Models (LLMs) have conceded that AI models rely on copyrighted works that are taken without consent or payment, and Australian workers have already seen their works stolen, including some of Australia’s most iconic plays and books. At a Senate inquiry last year, big tech companies repeatedly dodged questions about the provenance of work used in their AI models, and faced sustained questioning about the use of Australian voices, books and films in their models.
“It is disappointing to see a request for feedback about how things might be made easier for big tech, but nothing addressing the lost productivity and income for Australia and Australian creatives as a result of the infringement that has already taken place,” Pullen said. “It seems clear that the Productivity Commission favours weakening our existing laws.”
