In submissions to two government inquiries on artificial intelligence, the ASA has called on the Australian government to address the large-scale theft of Australian authors’ and illustrators’ work by multinational AI companies. 

Submitting to the Environment and Communications References Committee Inquiry into AI and Data Centres, and the Joint Select Committee on AI Inquiry, the ASA has underscored the need to reinforce and enforce our existing copyright law. 

AI companies overseas have committed what in Microsoft’s own words represents ‘the largest theft of labor in human history.’ Developers have taken a range of copyright material – much of it from pirate websites – and used it to train generative AI models, which these companies are commercialising and deploying around the world. It has provoked global outrage across the creative industries, consistent condemnation in public polling, and, to date, approximately 150 copyright infringement cases in the United States. By the AI companies’ own admission, this practice is unsustainable, poses an ‘existential threat’ to publishing, and ‘threatens the economic stability of those who create the content.’

Not only is Big Tech reaping the benefits of Australian authors’ and illustrators’ creative labour without permission or payment, but the generative AI models they have developed are being used to displace creators’ work and dilute their market. We are already seeing the harmful impacts upon professional author careers. A flood of AI-generated books are being uploaded to online retailers – 45% of submitted publications were rejected from Kobo on this basis. AI-generated knock-offs are being sold on Amazon. Traffic to news and other websites, where authors might build a platform or profile, are significantly dropping since chatbots were launched. Creators are losing commissions or supplementary sources of income like copywriting or graphic design jobs, which are also crucial professional skills-building opportunities. A recent UK report showed 86% of authors reported a drop in income due to generative AI. Australian authors earn just $18,200 per annum from their creative practice – these disruptions will make professional careers unsustainable.

The government is not powerless to address this.

We recognise the Australian Government’s ambition to accommodate frontier AI training in this country. This can be achieved without watering down creators’ rights. We do not need to devise a new scheme for Big Tech or upend copyright law to make it easier for these companies to continue their extractive practices onshore. We already have a framework in place. AI developers simply need to be compelled to license the copyright material that makes their technology possible.

Big Tech has a vested interest in claiming licensing is too difficult or expensive. The evidence suggests otherwise: AI companies are already entering licensing agreements where they judge the legal and commercial risks of proceeding without them to be too high.

Australia does not have to choose between AI investment and creators’ rights. It can – and must – insist on both.

The ASA’s central ask is that the government intervene to compel Big Tech to license copyright work as a condition of doing business in Australia. This can be achieved by introducing a mandatory code governing the practices of multinational AI developers, irrespective of where their models are trained. Alternatively, the government must consider strengthening the Copyright Act by expressly enabling rightsholders to bring a claim in Australia, regardless of whether the models are trained onshore or offshore. This must be supplemented by the introduction of statutory damages, transparency requirements, and protections for Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property.

We urge all authors and illustrators to contact your local MPs about this issue. What we have learned was done to Medicare by OpenAI has been – and continues to be – done to Australia’s writers, illustrators, musicians, composers, artists, playwrights, and creators. These companies have demonstrated a flagrant disregard for our rights, and the creative work they need to build their tools. In testimony given in May 2020, OpenAI policy director, Jack Clark stated, ‘there will be a point where a bunch of artists express worry about what we’re doing here and we’ll likely ignore their concerns and release anyway.’ The tech companies have told us what they really think. Now it’s time for us to tell the government what we think.

Share your views about the theft that has already occurred, the impact upon your practice and career, and the ASA’s Joint Select Committee submission calling for action. You can find your local MP on the APH website.