Productivity Commission: AI risks to creatives now, not 30 years down the track

A key government adviser on artificial intelligence says artists, writers and publishers are already being impacted by problems with the emerging technology and regulation is needed urgently, as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese brushes off calls to water down copyright laws.

A Productivity Commission report ahead of Canberra’s economic reform roundtable said it needed more information about potential copyright reforms to deal with AI models being trained on existing works such as books, music, films, news reports and art.

One option flagged was adding a “fair dealing” exemption to allow text and data mining, which has raised the ire of creative and media industries.

Professor Ed Santow, from the UTS Human Technology Institute, said the middle road on regulation should mean those using AI didn’t face extra red tape, but nor did they “benefit from some kind of regulatory discount”.

The Productivity Commission and Government shouldn’t need more proof on the importance of taking action, he said.

“There are risks and threats that are materialising right now,” said Professor Santow, who serves on several government advisory committees including the Commonwealth’s AI Expert Group.

“For people who are artists and writers and indeed publishers, these are problems that are happening right now. It’s not like some theoretical problem that might happen 30 years into the future.”

But whatever policymakers landed on in terms of rules for AI, Professor Santow said they must ensure it was clear how they were applied and enforced.

“What we need to do is go, okay so what are the priority changes that would do two things: add to community trust for AI, and give clear guidance to innovators as to how to stay on the right side of the law.

“You do those two things, then you’re, I think, able to move forward really quickly… I think we should be doing this within the next 12 months.”

Atlassian co-founder Scott Farquhar has called for AI exemptions from copyright, telling the National Press Club last month that Australia was out of sync with the rest of the world and it was a barrier to AI companies.

But Mr Albanese poured cold water on that idea on Thursday.

“It’s good there’s debate about it, but copyright and intellectual property is important,” he said.

Society and policymakers needed to work through how to maximise the benefits of AI, especially in boosting productivity, but minimise other factors, he said.

“Across the board, AI is obviously a complex issue, it’s something that is an emerging technology, something that will change the way that we live and work, and engage with each other.”

The Australian Council of Trade Unions and the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance want to see robust protections for creative industries, insisting that if someone’s output is used to build more profitable AI models, they deserve to be paid.

The Copyright Agency, which collects and distributes copyright payments, also opposes AI exemptions.

It argues this would only serve the interests of multinational tech companies at the expense of Australian creative industries.

Shadow productivity minister Andrew Bragg said it was “fundamentally not true” for anyone to claim existing copyright laws didn’t apply to AI.

“Artists, media outlets need to be paid for their work,” he said, citing the five-year deal News Corp struck with Open AI last year that allowed it access to the media company’s catalogue.

“I know the Labor Party loves talking about new laws, and the statute books have grown to record levels under them, including 5000 new regulations in the last Parliament, but what we’re effectively needing here is better law enforcement.”

Professor Santow agreed the first step was to apply existing laws but cautioned that was always difficult in an area where new issues were raised, such as with emerging technology.

Several cases are underway in the United States testing whether training AI models on existing artistic works breaches copyright or intellectual property laws, but they will take time to play out.

“There are a relatively small number of companies that are big enough to be able to sustain those big test cases .... but we do need those organisations to fulfil that role because that’s, unfortunately, the way our legal system works,” Professor Santow said.

AI regulation and how to harness it to boost productivity will form part of the debate at the economic reform roundtable running on August 19-21.

It will also canvass tax reform and deregulation, although the Government is now playing up the latter more than the former.

Independent MP Kate Chaney on Thursday said she wants to see a “progressive GST” with the rate lifted to 15 per cent and exemptions on food, education and health removed.

Under the plan, every adult would get a $3300 “basics” rebate on GST paid, benefiting low-income households, while the extra tax collected would flow to Commonwealth coffers not the States.

Mr Albanese said there would be “a range of ideas floated” ahead of the roundtable.

“The only tax policy that we’re implementing is the one that we took to the election,” he said, referencing the “top-up” tax cuts legislated before the campaign.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers – having kicked off the roundtable process calling for good faith debate about ideas – was caught criticising News Corp’s coverage in a hot mic moment at one of the lead-up events.

He told Productivity Commissioner Danielle Wood that The Australian newspaper had “basically done a headline of the opposite of what I’d said”, in remarks captured by television cameras in the room.

Ms Wood replied, “They’re getting so many things factually wrong,” and Dr Chalmers added, “Deliberately so.”