Australia’s cabinet is weighing an AI copyright carve-out that independent senator David Pocock says would let technology companies train commercial models on Australian creative work. Industry minister Tim Ayres calls the claim “reckless speculation” and his office says the government has “ruled out a text and data mining exception.” Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young went further on Tuesday, demanding a moratorium on new datacentres until “we get the regulations right.”
Pocock used Senate question time on Tuesday to press Ayres on what he described as two competing cabinet submissions. One would create a copyright carve-out for AI companies tied to billions of dollars in datacentre investment and hundreds of millions of dollars annually for a new creative industries fund. The other would extend existing licensing arrangements so AI companies could legally use Australian content to train their models. The Senate exchange sets up a high-stakes fortnight before any cabinet decision.
Two Plans Sit on the Cabinet Table
Guardian Australia has reported that the Department of Industry, Science and Resources and the Attorney-General’s Department are split over which approach to take on the AI copyright question. Both submissions are in train inside cabinet. Ministers are weighing a new exemption from copyright rules in exchange for greater investment in Australian hosted datacentres, or a licensing extension to cover AI model developments.
Under the carve-out branch, AI companies could mine Australian books, journalism, songs and images to train their commercial products. Under the licensing path, payment and permission structures would be preserved. A new fund for creative industries could also be part of the package, according to the cabinet split over AI copyright. Under either branch, expedited approvals for new datacentres could be part of the broader industry deal.
Pocock said he had been provided information showing Anthony Albanese was preparing to announce a plan on or about 15 July, potentially offering expedited approvals and investment for new datacentres. The ABC has not independently verified the whistleblower’s identity, the existence of the cabinet submissions, or the contents of the claim, though Pocock told the network a “credible source” had provided detailed information to his office.
| Submission | Mechanism | What AI companies get | What changes for creators |
|---|---|---|---|
| Carve-out branch | New copyright exemption (text and data mining) | Permission to train on Australian content without individual licences, in exchange for billions in datacentre investment and hundreds of millions annually for a creative fund | No payment or permission required to mine books, journalism, songs and other works |
| Licensing extension | Expanded licensing arrangements covering AI model development | Legal clearance to train on Australian material through negotiated licences | Some form of payment or permission system preserved |
Why Tech Companies Are Pushing for Change
Tech industry figures have argued for months that Australia’s copyright system makes it harder to invest in local AI infrastructure. This month Atlassian co-founder and Tech Council of Australia chair Scott Farquhar told The Australian Financial Review AI Summit that urgent copyright reform was needed to secure AI investment. Industry representatives and ministers have been meeting in recent weeks as the policy window narrows.
Farquhar said AI companies would need to “cut a deal with every single recording artist in the entire world” to comply with Australia copyright law, and that this complexity was scaring away investment. His argument maps onto a framing Ayres pushed in the Senate on Tuesday.
Ayres told the chamber it is not in Australia’s national interest to be “a cork bobbing on the ocean of other people’s technology and a customer at the long end of technology supply chains.” He said it is “absolutely our intention” to protect Australian content producers who are “currently getting ripped off all around the world.” That “sells out future generations,” he added. Sovereign capability in technology, he said, was the priority.
Pocock framed the lobbying as “intense” and warned that AI proprietors were pushing hard behind the scenes, according to the creative sector warning on copyright carve-outs. The same push is playing out in other data centre booms, including India’s AI data centre power and jobs trade-off.
The Government’s Denial, and What It Did Not Rule Out
Ayres rejected the claim in the chamber. He accused Pocock of “reckless speculation” for airing the questions in an ABC radio interview on Monday and in parliament on Tuesday. He also praised the assistant minister for science, technology and the digital economy, Andrew Charlton, for his handling of AI policy.
A spokesperson for Ayres told Guardian Australia that Pocock’s claims were incorrect. “That is inaccurate,” the spokesperson said. “The government has ruled out a text and data mining exception. Our position has not changed.” Spokespersons for Charlton and for Attorney-General Michelle Rowland issued the same line, and a spokesperson for Rowland also denied a plan to weaken copyright protection for AI training.
Yet the denial left a gap that Pocock seized on. “The minister accused me of reckless speculation, but, rather curiously, could not simply rule out the speculation,” Pocock said after Ayres answered. The exchange was briefly interrupted as Senate president Sue Lines struggled to control the chamber.
Pocock told the ABC that a “credible source” had provided detailed information to his office. The ABC has not independently verified the whistleblower’s identity, the existence of the cabinet submissions, or the contents of the claim.
Inside the governing party the policy direction has moved. The former industry minister Ed Husic had argued for new AI guardrails and consideration of a major new act, but he was dumped from cabinet in 2025. Ayres, his successor, is in favour of a lighter touch approach, according to the Guardian.
- October 2025: Attorney-General Michelle Rowland declares the government will not grant a copyright exemption for AI training.
- May 2026: Rowland reiterates the stance to the ABC, with no plans to weaken copyright protections for AI.
- 23 June 2026: Pocock raises competing cabinet submissions in Senate question time, and Ayres denies the carve-out plan exists.
Creators Brace for a Copyright Reset
Creative industry figures did not wait for cabinet to clarify the position. Within hours of Pocock’s question time clash, peak bodies and academic experts were lining up to flag what the proposals would mean. ARIA chief executive Annabelle Herd told the ABC the creative industries would be gravely concerned if the government was considering reversing its previous rejection of a text and data mining exception. “The creative and media industries have not been consulted on such a proposal and would vehemently oppose such a radical intervention into a free market that is burgeoning with commercial opportunity for Australian creators,” Herd said.
University of Sydney law professor Kimberlee Weatherall said Australian copyright law was out of date but that any fund raised major questions about who would actually be paid. “If it is about paying copyright owners, the immediate question is: what about human creators?” Weatherall said.
She flagged Indigenous creators and groups who may want culturally significant material to be off limits as a particular concern. UNSW law professor Kathy Bowrey was blunter still on the broader case for the carve-out. “The argument that we need this in order to operate data centres in Australia is also rubbish,” Bowrey said. “What is the work that the exception is supposed to do, as opposed to a licence?”
The Stakes for Power and Water in the Datacentre Build
For Hanson-Young, the copyright fight is a sideshow next to the resources question. The Greens senator and chair of a parliamentary inquiry into AI and datacentres wants building and approval of new facilities halted until regulations catch up, with submissions now open.
We are sleepwalking into an AI crisis. Until Australia’s laws are up to the task of regulating the big tech bros and their power-hungry datacentres, they should not be given the greenlight to drain our power and water.
Australia’s resources cannot absorb a tech bro free-for-all on water and power, she said, until the regulatory settings are in place. The Australian Greens framed the same point in their inquiry announcement (see the Greens’ AI data centre inquiry announcement). On the broader fossil fuel buildout behind the AI infrastructure push, see Big Tech’s fossil fuel buildout for AI data centres. Hanson-Young also noted that the same fiscal incentives now on the table for datacentres are part of the broader carve-out proposal.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the AI copyright carve-out that David Pocock says cabinet is considering?
Pocock told the Senate on Tuesday that cabinet is weighing a copyright carve-out that would let AI companies text and data-mine Australian creative work in exchange for billions in datacentre investment and hundreds of millions of dollars annually for a new creative industries fund. A second submission would extend existing licensing arrangements so AI companies could legally use Australian material to train their proprietary models. The plan has not been confirmed by the government.
What is a text and data mining exception?
A text and data mining exception is a copyright carve-out that lets AI companies copy and analyse material such as books, journalism, songs, and images to train systems without negotiating individual licences with each rights holder. A licensing extension is a different model that preserves some form of payment or permission system, similar to the arrangements schools, universities and TAFEs already use.
What did the government say in response to Pocock’s claim?
Industry minister Tim Ayres accused Pocock of “reckless speculation” for raising the question publicly. A spokesperson for Ayres told Guardian Australia that the government has “ruled out a text and data mining exception” and that the position has not changed. Spokespersons for assistant minister Andrew Charlton and Attorney-General Michelle Rowland issued the same line, and a spokesperson for Rowland also denied a plan to weaken copyright protection for AI training.
What is the Senate inquiry on AI and datacentres, and what will it examine?
Hanson-Young chairs the Senate inquiry into artificial intelligence and datacentres, which is currently open for submissions. According to the Greens’ inquiry announcement, it will examine the environmental, economic and social impacts of AI datacentres, including their energy and water consumption, effects on local communities and Australia’s regulatory system. The committee wants to hear from communities whose land, water or local wildlife is on the line.
What is the creative fund attached to the carve-out plan?
Under Pocock’s account of one of the cabinet submissions, the carve-out path would see AI companies commit datacentre investment in Australia and direct annual payments to a new fund for creative industries in return for permission to text and data-mine Australian content. It is unclear which fund mechanism would apply, who would administer payments, and whether creators could opt out, including Indigenous creators who may want culturally significant material excluded.
