'Creative Work Is the Only Ingredient They Refuse to Pay For': APRA AMCOS Hits Back at OpenAI

APRA AMCOS has hit back at OpenAI over its push for changes to Australian copyright law, arguing AI companies need to negotiate licensing deals with creators rather than seek weaker protections.

The music rights organisation responded after OpenAI’s vice president of global policy, Ann O’Leary, said Australia’s existing copyright settings were preventing the company from building an AI training centre locally. OpenAI has been participating in government consultations over potential copyright reforms, amid a broader debate over how copyrighted material can be used to train AI models.

APRA AMCOS CEO Dean Ormston said no multinational AI platform operating in Australia had approached the organisation about licensing music for training purposes.

“Since generative AI models became publicly available at the end of 2022, no multinational AI platform operating in Australia has approached us to discuss how a licence for training would work. Not one enquiry in nearly four years,” Ormston said.

“Every other ingredient in these products is paid for at market rates, without complaint. They pay Nvidia for the chips. They pay for the power, the water, the land and the construction. They pay their engineers, and they pay their army of lawyers and lobbyists. Creative work is the only ingredient they refuse to pay for, and it is the one ingredient without which none of it functions. A model trained on nothing produces nothing.

“We have licensed music in this country for 100 years and very little of it came easily. Commercial radio, television, streaming services, the digital platforms. Every one of them argued with us, several fought us for years, and some of it was settled in court. That is how a price gets set, and it has always ended in the same place. A licence is built, and money reaches the people who wrote the songs," he continued. 

“The machinery to do that exists and it is ready. What is different here is the refusal to turn up. Describing copyright as a barrier, having never once tested it, does not stand up.”

The intervention comes as the Australian Government considers how its copyright framework should apply to AI training. Documents reported by ABC this week outlined potential reforms that could allow AI companies to train on some online copyrighted material without individual licensing agreements, including an opt-out model.

Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles has rejected suggestions that OpenAI’s comments amount to a threat to withdraw investment, saying the government believes Australia can pursue AI investment while protecting rights holders, including creatives and news organisations.

Ormston said Australia’s intellectual property should be treated as an asset in negotiations with international AI companies.

“Australian intellectual property and copyright is one of the few inputs in this build that Australia actually owns. The chips are imported. The models are foreign owned. What is being proposed is that we hand over the part we hold for nothing, in exchange for infrastructure that could be relocated at any time,” he said. “Investment that is conditional on a country rewriting its property law is not investment.”

APRA AMCOS has also called on the Federal Government to commission a study quantifying the value of Australian intellectual property and copyright as a national asset class before further negotiations with AI developers.

“No one has ever measured what this asset is worth. It appreciates when it is licensed into AI development and it depreciates every time it is stolen without a licence. Government should know the value of what is being brokered before anyone sits down to discuss it,” Ormston continued.

“We want AI training to happen in Australia, built on Australian ingenuity, and properly licensed. That offer has been open since 2023 and it remains open today. The invitation is a simple one. Tell us what you need and we'll negotiate a price.”