VIDEO: Musicians making their voices heard in AI copyright warTom Hartley7.30Wed 1 Jul 2026 at 7:55pmWed 1 Jul 2026 at 7:55pmWed 1 Jul 2026 at 7:55pmHas Video Duration: 7 minutes 25 seconds.Watch 7m Musicians making their voices heard in AI copyright warShare optionsFacebookLinkedInX (formerly Twitter)TranscriptTOM HARTLEY, REPORTER: Dave Faulkner is fastidiously mixing his rock band’s latest album.DAVE FAULKNER, HOODOO GURUS: Anything else earlier than that?TOM HARTLEY:  By hand, by ear, by feel. DAVE FAULKNER:  Here we go.TOM HARTLEY:  It’s how the Hoodoo Gurus have produced four decades of hits. DAVE FAULKNER:  Alright, let’s do a little of the vocal there now. TOM HARTLEY:  And now, in the age of machine learning Dave says it’s what separates art from artificial intelligence. DAVE FAULKNER:  I mean, a robot can simulate what feelings are about. It's the way you synthesize it and make it real for the moment and express it in a cogent, human way that makes it art.   TOM HARTLEY:  As AI-made-music proliferates, the plight to protect intellectual property takes him back to the early days. DAVE FAULKNER:  We've had people like jingle writers appropriate our sound. For example, I think ‘Like Wow Wipeout’ was copied and it sounded a lot like it, but it wasn't it.The ins and outs of copyright and things like that were very much rammed home to me early on in our career and that's a human doing it, but now it's got a machine that's automated to do it even better and to do it without you being able to detect what they've done. And in fact, they are stealing it as we speak and we're not happy about it.TOM HARTLEY: Generative AI is progressing faster than reform and for years, platforms have been freely using data – including music - to train their large language models. Some of which can seamlessly generate music. For instance, this synthetic tune.(Music)Until recently, most artists have had virtually no idea if their intellectual property, their sound, has been used to feed these machines.But a new tool by American publication the Atlantic suggests millions of songs have ended up inside these systems, in these data sets, with no clear explicit permission or payment.PROF. KATHY BOWREY, UNIVERSITY OF NSW:  What is a surprise and what is still a bit shocking is the way in which the law is simply not being followed at all and there doesn't seem to be any really serious repercussions from that. TOM HARTLEY:  For instance, if you type in Hoodoo Gurus.DAVE FAULKNER:  Lo and behold, a few of them were using Hudoo Guru songs. So I think that's probably our whole catalogue. TOM HARTLEY:  At that point did it feel more personal, Dave, than...DAVE FAULKNER: Totally makes it personal. It's our hearts and our minds and our creativity that goes into that and that belongs to us to determine where it goes.TOM HARTLEY:  We searched the databases ourselves and the list seems endless. Every Australian artist you see here appears to have had their music mined from acclaimed First Nations artist Gurrumul to singer songwriter Paul Dempsey. In some cases, it’s entire catalogues of work. PAUL DEMPSEY, MUSICIAN: And it's completely unjust. And unjust is, that is the correct word, because we have a law at the moment and everyone has to adhere to that law. For some reason we're talking about exempting it for one gigantically wealthy industry.TOM HARTLEY:  Paul Dempsey is referring to the regulatory tug-of-war that’s been happening here in Canberra for several years.KATHY BOWREY:  A lot of the discussion in copyright has happened behind closed doors by stakeholders arguing with each other or arguing with government about what they say they need. TOM HARTLEY:  The tech sector has aggressively lobbied for changes to copyright law that would give AI systems freer access to use Australian content. SCOTT FARQUHAR, TECH COUNCIL OF AUSTRALIA (August 2025):  I think that the benefits of the large language models and so forth that we’ve got, outweigh those issues...TOM HARTLEY:  The industry’s most prominent voice has consistently warned that Australia could otherwise miss out on the AI revolution and big dollars from data centres.SCOTT FARQUHAR (August 2025):  They will get built over the next five years, and I hope they get built here. TOM HARTLEY:  The industry's argument is that you've got to strike that balance and to innovate and to push ahead. DAVE FAULKNER:  Oh, please stop this innovate word. It's just nonsenseDEAN ORMSTONE, APRA AMCOS: A crime is being committed every day of the week - copying that has been done without people's permission and without payment, that is criminal.TOM HARTLEY:  Dean Ormstone is the boss of APRA AMCOS – a century-old body, managing rights and the intellectual property of musical artists. Last October the government publicly assured the sector: MICHELLE ROWLAND, ATTORNEY-GENERAL (October 2025):  We would not be introducing any changes that would water down the copyright act and those protections are fundamental to Australian creatives. TOM HARTLEY:  I thought this conversation was over. What's changed? DEAN ORMSTONE:  What's happened is the multinational companies have retreated, regrouped, reattacked.DAVID POCOCK, INDEPENDENT SENATOR:  I'm hearing some pretty concerning reports that the government is preparing to do a major backflip on its earlier promise.TOM HARTLEY:  Last fortnight speculation in Canberra was rife after Senator David Pocock attributed these concerns to a whistleblower.DAVID POCOCK: Minister it’s been put to me the government is in fact considering competing proposals allowing some form of carveout or extension to the licensing in exchange for a new creative arts fund and the Prime Minister to announce this plan on or around the 15th July. TOM HARTLEY:  Despite Innovation Minister Tim Ayres disputing Pocock’s claims as: TIM AYRES, INNOVATION MINISTER:   Your reckless speculation about these issues.TOM HARTLEY:  It stirred a wasp's nest of creative sector representatives who, this morning, converged on Canberra calling for mediation. DEAN ORMSTONE:  We need to hold firm and we are open and ready to do businessTOM HARTLEY:  The tech council said it hopes a path forward can be found that enables AI to be developed here in Australia, in the national interest, while ensuring fair outcomes for creators and the creative industries.PAUL DEMPSEY:  You know the tech industry loves to say, move fast and break things, but they don't have to break everything. It's not a condition of progress.TOM HARTLEY:  Attorney General Michelle Rowland told 7.30, “... there are no plans to weaken copyright protections ...”And she encourages both sectors to find a workable and sensible solution. PAUL DEMPSEY:  I expect them to stick to their word, and not just this government, but successive governments. It shouldn't change. It doesn't need to change.TOM HARTLEY:  But some academics believe otherwise.KATHY BOWREY: Copyright law does need to change. Australian law is way too complicated, it's way too complex and it doesn't necessarily secure good returns to Australian creators in any case, but we also need other kinds of AI. We need AI for research and development, and we don't want to be stuck in a position where we're kind of locked into having to use AI models which are made overseas.TOM HARTLEY:  Is there any world in which there is a balance or a deal to be struck?DAVE FAULKNER:  No. What deal? What's the deal? Someone wants to rob you, so you let them in the front door and say, "Help yourself." Is that the answer? I'd rather call a policeman and say, "Don't let them in, please, or take them to jail if you catch them with our stuff."Australia’s music industry is putting the federal government on the spot over artificial intelligence and copyright. Tom Hartley reports. AustraliaCopyright