Kylie Minogue and Nick Cave music allegedly used in AI training, according to publishers
Kylie Minogue and Nick Cave are among several Australian artists whose back catalogues are (allegedly) being used to train AI without consent or payment, the International Confederation of Music Publishers has argued. This is because, for now, Australia has more libertarian rules around commercial AI training than other large music markets.
Australia is something of an international outlier when it comes to copyright protections for commercial AI training. 62 countries have considered potential changes to copyright protections, The Guardian Australia reported, but only one of the 62 countries - Australia - has introduced a new "text-and-data-mining" exception and has not agreed to improve copyright holders' exclusive rights. A text-and-data-mining exception would essentially mean that an artist's back catalogue cannot be mass-analysed and pilfered from.
In many cases, artists can - and do - opt out of AI training clauses as part of their contracts with labels and publishers. The International Confederation of Music Publishers, which represents Sony, Warner, Universal, and others, accused AI companies of pushing Australian policymakers towards a system that allows training on copyrighted material without asking for licenses.
John Phelan, its managing director, said: “They're trying to strong-arm Australian policymakers into ‘if you don't do this, we won't invest.’” He argued that the cost of developing AI models, pressure to generate returns, and US copyright litigation is likely panicking companies and forcing them to seek easier solutions elsewhere. Namely, Australia.
The ICMP supplied material to The Guardian Australia showing that Google’s Gemini could generate lyrics associated with Minogue and Cave. Phelan also cited a music dataset reported by The Atlantic in June containing more than 12 million tracks sourced from YouTube videos, including works by Minogue and Cave.
However, in July, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said it would be “theft” if artists could not retain control over whether their work was used to train AI and what they were paid for that use. A parliamentary committee examining AI policy has since called for a review. In a joint letter to Albanese, Labour chair Jo Briskey and deputy chair Liberal senator Jonathon Duniam recommended that the government “examine current copyright settings” while ensuring creators retain control over their work and receive payment.
Sign up to Best Fit's Substack for regular dispatches from the world of pop culture