Music body warns Australia is alone in weighing AI copyright changes as Minogue and Cave songs used without pay

Global publishers say tech firms are 'strong-arming' Canberra to weaken copyright law to train AI models

By LineZotpaper

Published19 October 2026

Read Time3 min

Sources2 outlets

The global music publishing body ICMP has warned that Australian artists including Kylie Minogue and Nick Cave have already had their work used to train AI without compensation, and that Australia appears to be the only country among dozens approached that is seriously considering weakening copyright law to satisfy tech companies.

The International Confederation of Music Publishers (ICMP), which represents Sony, Warner and Universal and thousands of independent publishers, said Australian artists including Kylie Minogue and Nick Cave have already had their work used to train AI models without compensation. Of dozens of countries approached to water down copyright laws, Australia appears to be the only one considering it, the group said.

ICMP managing director John Phelan accused AI companies of trying to "strong-arm" Australian policymakers and of asking them to "legitimise larceny". He said companies had trained on music using methods such as spreadsheets containing millions of lines of music on YouTube. In evidence provided exclusively to Guardian Australia, ICMP showed Google's Gemini could reproduce lyrics from Minogue, G-Flip and Nick Cave. Phelan also pointed to a dataset reported by The Atlantic in June containing more than 12 million songs pulled from YouTube, including tracks from Minogue, Cave and Hilltop Hoods.

Phelan said 62 countries had considered legal changes, but none of the other 61 had introduced a text and data mining exception for commercial purposes or reduced exclusive rights. "The world is very much watching what Australia does," he said. In July, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said it would be "theft" if artists did not retain control over whether their work was used to train AI.

The parliamentary AI committee's Labor chair, Jo Briskey, and deputy chair, Liberal senator Jonathon Duniam, wrote to the prime minister this week recommending the government "examine current copyright settings" while ensuring creators retain control and are paid. They described a stalemate: AI models already train on copyrighted works in the United States without compensation, but companies are withholding frontier AI training in Australia without law changes. Senator David Pocock raised concerns that the position was predetermined by the prime minister after staffer edits were seen in the letter; Briskey rejected the claim.

Anthropic's special envoy, Jeffrey Bleich, told the committee the company was not trying to dictate terms. "You can't license the entire internet," he said. OpenAI's Adam Cohen said US fair use "fundamentally protects" new technology, pointing to deals with News Corp and the Guardian. Phelan said AI companies, facing litigation and investment pressure in the US, may be seeking a legislative solution in Australia to secure their business model without licences.

Analysis

Why This Matters

Australia's decision could set a global precedent: ICMP says the world is watching whether any country adopts an exception for commercial AI training.
It will decide whether Australian creators are paid when their music, writing and journalism are used to train AI models.
The fight captures the broader standoff between creative industries and AI companies over copyright, licensing and compensation.

Background

AI systems are trained on vast amounts of text, images and audio, much of it scraped from the internet, and much of it protected by copyright. In the United States, fair use rules give AI companies legal cover they do not have in most other jurisdictions, which is why they are seeking changes in countries like Australia. The parliamentary committee's letter suggests both major parties see the current situation as an unresolved standoff in which neither creators nor AI companies are satisfied.

Key Perspectives

Music publishers (ICMP): Using artists' work to train AI without permission or payment amounts to theft, and weakening copyright would interfere with how creative industries contract worldwide. AI companies (Anthropic, OpenAI): Licensing the entire internet is impractical, fair use-style exceptions protect innovation, and current Australian law could make standard training illegal. They note they already make some licensing deals. Parliamentarians and critics: The committee wants copyright settings examined while protecting creators' control and payment; Senator Pocock questions whether the process is being steered by the prime minister's office.

What to Watch

The Australian government's formal response to the committee's letter and any proposed copyright amendments.
Whether ICMP's evidence that AI models reproduce lyrics publicly shifts the debate.
Whether other countries follow or resist Australia's lead, and the outcome of US copyright litigation against AI companies.

Sources

Kylie Minogue songs already used to train AI as tech firms ‘strong-arm’ Australian government, music body warns · Australia news | The Guardian
Kylie Minogue songs already used to train AI as tech firms ‘strong-arm’ Australian government, music body warns · World news | The Guardian

Checked

12 claims in this story checked against 2 sources: 10 supported.

Show each claim

Partly supportedHeadline: Australia is 'alone' in weighing AI copyright changes among dozens of countries approachedWorld news | The Guardian: “Australia appears to be the only to consider doing so.”
Partly supportedHeadline: Minogue and Cave songs used without pay (stated as fact)World news | The Guardian: “AI has already been trained on the works of Australian artists including Kylie Minogue and Nick Cave without compensation, the peak global body for music rights has claimed”
SupportedSummary: publishers say tech firms are 'strong-arming' Canberra to weaken copyright law to train AI modelsAustralia news | The Guardian: “tech companies seeking to weaken copyright law”
SupportedLede: ICMP says Australian artists including Minogue and Nick Cave have had their work used to train AI without compensationWorld news | The Guardian: “the peak global body for music rights has claimed”
SupportedJohn Phelan accused AI companies of trying to 'strong-arm' Australian policymakers and asking them to 'legitimise larceny'World news | The Guardian: “They’re trying to strong-arm Australian policymakers into ‘if you don’t do this, we won’t invest’.”
SupportedICMP showed Google's Gemini could reproduce lyrics from Minogue, G-Flip and Nick CaveWorld news | The Guardian: “ICMP showed Google’s Gemini was able to reproduce lyrics from Australian artists including Kylie Minogue, G-Flip and Nick Cave”
SupportedA dataset reported by The Atlantic in June contained more than 12 million songs pulled from YouTubeWorld news | The Guardian: “an AI training dataset reported by the Atlantic in June , which contains more than 12m songs pulled from YouTube videos”
SupportedPhelan said 62 countries had considered legal changes but none of the other 61 introduced a text and data mining exception for commercial purposes or reduced exclusive rightsWorld news | The Guardian: “There isn’t a single country among the other 61 [countries] … which has introduced a new text and data mining exception for commercial purposes, or reduce the idea of exclusive rights and copyright,”
SupportedAlbanese said in July that it would be 'theft' if artists did not retain control over AI training useWorld news | The Guardian: “In July, Anthony Albanese said it would be “theft” if artists did not retain control over whether their work was used to build and train AI”
SupportedPocock raised concerns the position was predetermined by the PM after staffer edits were seen in the letter; Briskey rejected the claimWorld news | The Guardian: “The independent senator David Pocock has raised concerns that the committee was coming to a position on copyright predetermined by the prime minister, after staffer edits were seen in the letter. Briskey has rejected the claim.”
SupportedAnthropic's Jeffrey Bleich told the committee: 'You can't license the entire internet'World news | The Guardian: ““You can’t license the entire internet. Billions and billions of information exists there which is available to be viewed and studied, and that’s essentially what training is,” he said.”
SupportedOpenAI's Adam Cohen said US fair use 'fundamentally protects' new technology, pointing to deals with News Corp and the GuardianWorld news | The Guardian: “OpenAI’s chief of economic policy, Adam Cohen, said the fair use exception in US law “fundamentally protects” the development of new technology. He pointed to agreements made with News Corp and the Guardian”