In short
The Australian government is weighing a change to copyright law that would let AI companies train models on books without a licence unless rights holders opt out. Australian publishers and authors told a parliamentary inquiry that permission must come first, and on 26 October the US Authors Guild joined a global protest, warning that the rule would cover the work of authors worldwide.
- The proposal is an "opt-out" model: training is allowed until an author objects
- The Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence is due to report by 30 November 2026
- Writers' groups want disclosure of training data, consent and payment
Australian book publishing is in what writers and publishers now call an "existential crisis" over generative AI, ABC News reported on 28 October. At the centre is a leaked government proposal for an opt-out copyright system, under which tech companies could train AI models on published books without asking first, as long as rights holders who object have a way to say no. Publishers Weekly reported on 26 October that the Authors Guild has joined an international campaign against the change and is asking writers to sign a public statement.
The fight is about books, but it is also about software. Every AI writing assistant, audiobook voice and recommendation engine is built on data, and the question of where that data came from is moving from the courtroom into product design. For publishers, small presses and author platforms that want AI features without the legal fog, the cleaner route is tooling trained or grounded only on catalogues they own or license, with every source logged. That is the kind of custom software built by YuSMP Group and similar studios, rather than a general model of unknown provenance bolted onto a website.
The Australian story also follows a month of AI controversies in the book trade, which we covered in our note on AI disclosure after the Goncourt case.
What is Australia proposing?
Under current Australian law, as under most copyright systems, you need permission to copy a work. An opt-out model reverses that default. AI developers could use books for training unless the author or publisher has registered an objection, so the burden moves to the people who wrote the books.
The government has not published a final bill. What is known comes from the leaked proposal and from submissions to the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence, which ABC says is due to deliver its final report by 30 November 2026. Tech companies have lobbied Canberra for the change rather than seeking licences from authors one by one.
What did the inquiry hear?
At hearings in Sydney last week, the Australian Society of Authors, the Australian Publishers Association and well-known novelists asked the committee to require AI developers to disclose what they trained on, ask permission and pay. Books+Publishing reported that the publishers' association told the inquiry that opt-in licensing is already working.
Louise Stark of Hachette Australia and New Zealand told ABC that AI companies seeking an opt-out model "are asking government to reverse a basic principle". ABC also cited a survey in which 86% of UK authors reported lower income because of generative AI, more than 150 AI-related lawsuits in the United States, and three Australian literary prize winners this year accused of using the technology. Memoirist Kylie Moore-Gilbert described losing income to AI-generated summaries and knock-offs of her book posted online.
Why does it matter outside Australia?
The Authors Guild's main worry is geography. An Australian exception would apply to books by authors anywhere, and AI companies could move their training to Australia and then deploy the resulting models worldwide, sidestepping the lawsuits still running in American courts. The Guild's statement puts it bluntly: creators' work "must only be used to train AI models in Australia with our explicit permission."
For indie science fiction writers this is not abstract. Ebooks sold through global stores are easy to collect, and genre fiction, with its invented vocabularies and long series, is exactly the kind of text that model builders find useful.
What can authors do now?
- Read and sign, if you agree. The Authors Guild statement is open to writers outside Australia, and the Authors Guild posts updates on the campaign.
- Record your rights position. If an opt-out register appears, you will want a list of your titles, ISBNs and rights holders ready. Keep it with your publishing records.
- Add a clear AI notice to your site and books. A short "not licensed for AI training" statement on your copyright page and website does not settle the law, but it documents your intent. Our guide on building an author website covers where such pages belong.
- Use AI tools on your own terms. If you do use assistants, choose ones that state what they train on. Our guide to AI tools for fiction writers explains how to keep your manuscripts out of training sets.
The committee's report at the end of November will show whether Canberra keeps permission first or moves to opt-out. Either way, the debate has made one thing clear: where training data comes from is now a question every writer, and every company building tools for writers, has to answer.
Independent reader guides, science notes and writing craft.
