A new report from security analyst Michael Shoebridge argues that big technology companies are using national security as a smokescreen to weaken Australia's copyright laws, warning that concessions to American AI giants risk turning the country into a haven for cybercriminals.
The report, commissioned by the Australian Recording Industry Association from Strategic Analysis Australia, challenges lobbying by OpenAI and Anthropic. Those companies have warned they will not train their most advanced AI models in Australia unless copyright protections are relaxed, linking major infrastructure investments to legal changes.
Shoebridge, a former deputy director of the Australian Signals Directorate and Defence Intelligence Organisation, argues that advanced cybersecurity relies on specialised computer code, encryption and classified intelligence, not copyrighted books, music or art. "AI for national security does not need Powderfinger's back catalogue," Shoebridge said. "Nobody has shown how training an AI model on Australian songs, novels or paintings makes us any better at stopping a cyberattack on the power grid or disrupting a terrorist plot. If the companies believe it does, the burden is on them to prove it."
At a parliamentary inquiry in September, Australian Signals Directorate director-general Abigail Bradshaw said training advanced AI models locally would deliver "significant benefits for national security", describing access to the technology as urgent. The Attorney-General's Department told the same inquiry copyright was the main concern raised by major AI developers. OpenAI vice-president Ann O'Leary warned the company could not establish an Australian training centre under existing laws, while Anthropic executive Jeff Bleich said individually licensing content was "technically impossible".
Shoebridge argues Australian defence and intelligence agencies can already secure access to advanced AI systems through commercial arrangements, and that training American-owned models in local data centres would not give Australia ownership or control. More seriously, he warns that weakening copyright protections could attract Chinese AI developers, organised crime networks and hackers seeking to exploit Australia's more permissive laws.
The report also questions the security credentials of major developers after OpenAI acknowledged its autonomous agents had accessed Australian government websites without authorisation, including systems involving Medicare-related information.
David Wroe, director of AI security at Good Ancestors, challenged Shoebridge's argument, warning that Australia risked losing access to the world's most powerful AI systems unless it helped develop them. Wroe said hosting American frontier models would give Australia greater leverage in securing cutting-edge technology, much as its defence cooperation with Washington helped secure advanced US military equipment. "The national security rationale for copyright reform is pretty clear: Australia needs access to the most advanced AI models, and we've got a much stronger hand in demanding that access from the Americans if we help build those models by having them trained here," Wroe said. He argued any compromise should protect and compensate copyright holders while giving technology companies legal certainty.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The outcome of Australia's copyright debate will set a precedent for how smaller economies balance big tech demands with domestic creative industries and security interests.
- If Australia weakens protections, other countries may follow, potentially reshaping the global AI training data landscape.
- The debate also affects whether major AI models are trained in Australia, impacting local data centre investment, skills development and sovereign capability.
Background
The Australian government faces pressure from Silicon Valley to allow AI developers greater access to copyrighted material for training large language models. The creative sector opposes changes, warning that existing laws protect artists, musicians and writers. The report from Strategic Analysis Australia is the latest intervention in a parliamentary inquiry examining the issue.
Key Perspectives
Michael Shoebridge: The national security argument is a bluff; AI training on copyrighted creative works has no demonstrated benefit for defence or intelligence tasks, and weakening copyright could attract cybercriminals and Chinese developers.
David Wroe: Australia needs to host advanced AI training to secure access to frontier models; copyright reform should protect and compensate creators while giving tech companies legal certainty.
Abigail Bradshaw (ASD): Training advanced AI models locally delivers significant national security benefits; access to the technology is urgent.
OpenAI and Anthropic: They have warned they will not train advanced models in Australia without copyright reform; Anthropic says individually licensing content is technically impossible.
What to Watch
- The parliamentary inquiry's recommendations on copyright and AI training, expected later this year.
- Whether the government signals any legislative changes in response to lobbying from both tech companies and the creative sector.
- How other advanced economies, particularly the EU and UK, handle similar copyright-AI tensions, as Australia might align with or diverge from their approaches.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 12 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedBig tech’s national-security argument for copyright reform is a bluff, according to a former intelligence official.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “Security analyst Michael Shoebridge says big tech companies are bluffing over national security concerns.”
- SupportedThe report warns that weakening copyright could attract Chinese AI developers and cybercriminals to Australia.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “More seriously, Shoebridge warns that weakening copyright protections could attract Chinese AI developers, organised crime networks and hackers seeking to exploit Australia’s more permissive laws”
- SupportedThe report was commissioned by the Australian Recording Industry Association and produced by Strategic Analysis Australia.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “The report, from Strategic Analysis Australia, challenges lobbying by companies including OpenAI and Anthropic”
- SupportedOpenAI and Anthropic have warned they will not train their most advanced AI models in Australia unless copyright protections are relaxed, and have linked major Australian infrastructure investments to legal changes.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “companies including OpenAI and Anthropic, which have warned they will not train their most advanced AI models in Australia unless copyright protections are relaxed.”
- SupportedShoebridge said: “Nobody has shown how training an AI model on Australian songs, novels or paintings makes us any better at stopping a cyberattack on the power grid or disrupting a terrorist plot. If the companies believe it does, the burden is on them to prove it.”Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: ““Nobody has shown how training an AI model on Australian songs, novels or paintings makes us any better at stopping a cyberattack on the power grid or disrupting a terrorist plot. If the companies believe it does, the burden is on them to prove it.””
- SupportedAt a September parliamentary inquiry, ASD director-general Abigail Bradshaw said local training of advanced AI models would bring “significant benefits for national security”.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “At a parliamentary inquiry in September, Australian Signals Directorate director-general Abigail Bradshaw said training advanced AI models locally would deliver “significant benefits for national security””
- SupportedAnthropic executive Jeff Bleich said individually licensing content was “technically impossible”.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “Anthropic executive Jeff Bleich said individually licensing content was “technically impossible”.”
- SupportedShoebridge argues that advanced cybersecurity depends on specialised code, encryption and classified intelligence rather than copyrighted books, music or art.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “Shoebridge, a former deputy director of the Australian Signals Directorate and Defence Intelligence Organisation, argues that advanced cybersecurity depends on specialised computer code, encryption and classified intelligence, not copyrighted books, music or art.”
- SupportedShoebridge says Australian defence and intelligence agencies can access advanced AI systems through commercial arrangements, while local data-centre training of American-owned models would not give Australia ownership or control.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “His report argues Australian defence and intelligence agencies can already secure access to advanced AI systems through commercial arrangements, while training American-owned models in local data centres would not give Australia ownership or control of the technology.”
- SupportedThe report questions major AI developers’ security credentials after OpenAI acknowledged its agents accessed Australian government websites without authorisation, including systems involving Medicare-related information.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “The report also questions the security credentials of major developers after OpenAI acknowledged its autonomous agents had accessed Australian government websites without authorisation, including systems involving Medicare-related information.”
- SupportedDavid Wroe challenged Shoebridge’s argument, warning Australia could lose access to the world’s most powerful AI systems unless it helped develop them.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: “But David Wroe, director of AI security at Good Ancestors – a group which has received philanthropic funds with personal and financial ties to Anthropic – challenged Shoebridge’s argument, warning that Australia risked losing access to the world’s most powerful AI systems unless it helped develop them.”
- SupportedWroe said Australia would have a stronger hand in seeking access to advanced AI models if it helped build them by having them trained locally.Sydney Morning Herald - Latest News: ““The national security rationale for copyright reform is pretty clear: Australia needs access to the most advanced AI models, and we’ve got a much stronger hand in demanding that access from the Americans if we help build those models by having them trained here.””
