Sunday 4 October 2026
Afternoon EditionRSS
ZOTPAPER

News without the noise

ZOTPAPER
Australia

Anthropic pushes for opt-out copyright model in Australia as ABC and SBS warn of news ‘cannibalisation’

AI firm says conditional approval would allow training on copyrighted works, but public broadcasters demand stronger protections for journalism

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
Sources2 outlets
AI company Anthropic, maker of the Claude chatbot, has urged the Australian government to adopt an opt-out model that would grant conditional approval for AI training on copyrighted content, acknowledging it will not secure a blanket exemption. The proposal faces sharp criticism from public broadcasters ABC and SBS, who warn the technology risks undermining public interest journalism and call for strict media regulations and compensation.

Anthropic has asked the Albanese government to consider allowing AI companies to train their models on Australian copyrighted works under an opt-out system, where rights holders could individually prohibit use of their material. The company framed the approach as a middle ground after conceding it cannot obtain a broad copyright exemption.

The ABC and SBS have pushed back strongly, arguing that AI firms should instead be subject to new rules that compensate media organisations and protect the viability of public interest journalism. The broadcasters described the risk as a “cannibalisation” of news content.

Anthropic has said AI technology could transform the Australian economy, but critics contend that unchecked use of copyrighted material without fair payment would weaken an already strained media sector. The federal government has not yet indicated which path it favours, leaving the debate unresolved as it considers broader copyright reforms for the AI era.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The outcome will set a precedent for how Australian news and creative content is used by AI models, affecting both media revenues and public access to reliable information.
  • Public broadcasters face direct competition from AI-generated summaries and articles, which could reduce traffic to original journalism.
  • The government’s decision will shape Australia’s position among countries grappling with copyright and AI, potentially influencing international norms.

Background

Australia is reviewing its copyright framework to address challenges posed by generative AI. Globally, AI companies have faced lawsuits and regulatory pushback for using copyrighted material without permission. The opt-out model is one of several proposals; media organisations have generally favoured an opt-in system requiring explicit licensing. The ABC and SBS, as taxpayer-funded public broadcasters, have a mandate to produce independent journalism, and they argue that AI tools threaten that mission if they can freely repurpose content.

Key Perspectives

Anthropic: Argues that an opt-out model strikes a balance between fostering AI innovation and respecting creator rights, allowing advancement of the technology while giving copyright holders control. ABC and SBS: Contend that any AI training on their content should require active consent and fair compensation, warning that an opt-out system would place an unfair burden on small media organisations and undermine public interest journalism. Critics/Skeptics: Some copyright advocates and smaller publishers worry that opt-out regimes still favour large tech companies, as rights holders may lack resources to track and enforce exclusions. Others question whether the government will move quickly enough to protect Australian content before AI models are fully trained.

What to Watch

  • The government’s formal response to Anthropic’s submission and any draft legislation on AI and copyright.
  • Whether ABC and SBS propose specific compensation mechanisms or licensing requirements.
  • International developments, such as similar debates in the European Union and United States, which could influence Australian policy.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.

How we workReport an errorSubscribe