63 Media Groups Tell Australia to Reject AI Training Opt-Out Copyright Plan

On October 20, 2026, a coalition of 63 international media organizations delivered a letter to senior Australian politicians with a blunt request: reject proposed changes to the country's copyright laws that would let artificial intelligence companies train their models on copyrighted material by default.

The letter, led by the News/Media Alliance, argues that the proposal would flip Australia's copyright system on its head. Instead of AI companies asking permission first, rights holders would have to find out their work was being used, then fill in a form and object in time to keep it out of training data sets. If they missed the window, their work could be used anyway.

What the proposal would actually do

Under Australia's current approach, permission comes first. A company that wants to use a book, a news article, a song, or a photograph generally needs a licence or some other legal basis before it can use that work. The proposed model works the other way around.

According to the letter, the plan under discussion is a statutory pool licence. AI companies could train on copyrighted material by default, and rights holders who did not want their work included would have to opt out. The letter does not name a specific bill, and the coalition did not publish a list of the politicians who received it, but a member statement from the Association of University Presses says the letter went to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

That is the core of the coalition's complaint: a system that requires each creator to monitor training-data registers and file objections on time will, in practice, leave much of their work inside the pool by default.

Who signed, and why the list matters

The 63 signatories span news, books, music, photography, and design. They include the Authors Guild, the Association of American Publishers, News Media Europe, and the World Association of News Publishers, known as WAN-IFRA. The American Association of Independent Music, America's Newspapers, the American Society of Media Photographers, and the Association of University Presses also joined.

Collectively, the groups say they represent thousands of copyright owners, creative sector organizations, and publishers around the world. The coalition wants Australian lawmakers to see this as a global creative-industry position, not a local dispute between a few publishers and a few tech firms.

The letter also notes that the proposed changes would reach far beyond Australia, and a rule set in Canberra could be copied by other governments weighing the same question. The signatories warn that Australia would set a dangerous negative precedent if it moved first in this direction.

The Australian backdrop: a fight that has been building all year

The October 20 letter did not arrive out of nowhere. It landed in the middle of a year-long argument inside Australia about how copyright should handle AI training.

According to reports, Prime Minister Albanese said in July 2026 that no company should train AI on Australian books, music, art, or news without the artist's control. In September, leaked slides reportedly showed the government weighing an opt-out model, which set off a wave of criticism from creative groups.

In early October, Anthropic envoy Jeff Bleich reportedly told the parliamentary AI inquiry that Australia's copyright regime was an obstacle that needed to change. On October 16, the International Confederation of Music Publishers reportedly called an opt-out model legitimising larceny, a phrase that captured how strongly parts of the music industry feel about the idea.

What the letter actually asks for

The coalition's ask is simple: keep the permission-first system. It wants lawmakers to reject the opt-out model and preserve the rule that rights holders control reproduction and use of their works, consistent with international treaties including the Berne Convention and the WIPO Copyright Treaty.

The letter frames this as a matter of basic fairness rather than a special favour for publishers. Training an AI model is not like quoting a sentence in a review, the argument runs. It involves copying vast amounts of work at industrial scale to build a commercial product that then competes with the very creators whose work trained it.

That disagreement is now the central copyright question in several countries at once. The United Kingdom moved away from an opt-out model earlier in 2026 after creative industries rejected it, and in the United States, authors have filed fresh lawsuits against AI companies over training data, according to reports.

What happens next

The letter itself changes no law. Its power is political. It gives Australian lawmakers a clear, on-the-record statement from the global creative sector that an opt-out regime would face sustained international opposition, and it links the copyright question to Australia's reputation as a country that holds tech platforms to account.

What lawmakers do next is still unclear. A review of copyright settings could end with the permission-first system intact, with a compromise such as a licensing market backed by collective bargaining, or with some version of the opt-out pool the letter opposes. The coalition's bet is that the political cost of choosing the last option has now gone up.

For Australian readers, the practical stakes are closer to home than a parliamentary letter might suggest. If training defaults to opt out, the books, songs, news, and photographs made in Australia could end up inside AI systems by default, with the burden of removal falling on the people who made them. If permission stays the default, AI companies will need to strike deals, and the price of those deals will shape how much of the AI economy flows back to creators.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the AI training opt-out plan Australia is considering?

According to the coalition's letter, the proposal is a statutory pool licence that would let AI companies train on copyrighted material by default, with rights holders required to opt out to keep their work out. The coalition says this reverses Australia's current permission-first rule.

Who sent the October 20 letter?

A coalition of 63 international media organizations led by the News/Media Alliance sent it to senior Australian politicians, including, according to one member statement, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. Signatories include the Authors Guild, the Association of American Publishers, News Media Europe, WAN-IFRA, and the American Association of Independent Music.

Has Australia already changed its copyright law for AI training?

No. The letter asks lawmakers to reject proposed changes, which means the debate is still open. No new opt-out law has been passed as part of this process, and the outcome will depend on what the government and parliament decide after the current review.