The Australian government has rejected an AI copyright exception. What does it mean for photographers?
If you’re an Australian photographer who’s spent the last year nervously watching tech headlines—between AI breakthroughs and not-so-science-fiction tales of robots learning to “paint like Picasso”—rest assured you are not being paranoid.
In fact, photographers have voiced real, deep concerns about the AI beast scraping Instagram, flickr and other part of the internet with an insatiable AI beast with a hunger that never seems to end.
Yes its true - clients have called my Melbourne legal practice with a familiar question:
“Is it true a company can just take my images to teach their AI? And will anyone ever pay for my photography again?”
Not long ago, the answer was, “Potentially... and it’s complicated!”
Recently, tech giants loudly lobbied Canberra asking for broad copyright exemptions—specifically, a “text and data mining” exception, which would have allowed them to lawfully ingest and analyse vast troves of creative work, often without the creator’s actual knowledge (let alone permission or a cheque).
This left photographers (and many others in the creative sector) feeling a bit like they’d set their camera down on a windy clifftop, and watched a passing seagull try to make off with it.
But now? We may just see some change.
The Australian government has made what could be called a somewhat rare move: they have listened.
And they’ve sided, at least for now, with creators, including photographers.
If the government does ever go ahead with a text and data mining exception, it would mean that AI companies and developers could freely use Australian creative works—like your photos, music, or writing—to train AI without having to ask permission or pay.
Your copyright protection would be weakened, and “feeding the endless appetite of the machine” could happen without your say-so, or any guarantee of fair payment.
But if there is no such an exception, your copyright stays strong meaning only you can decide if your work is used to train AI—so if this policy sticks, you keep control and can make sure you’re asked and compensated before your work becomes part of an AI’s database.
It’s a stance that departs from some previous policy recommendations and appears to be different from approaches taken in various other countries.
In short, Australia is sticking to a model where creators’ copyright remains strong—even as the global conversation about AI and copyright continues to evolve.
This is no doubt going to be a huge relief for Australian photographers —basically anyone who wants to keep ownership of the digital fruit of their labours. It means that, for all of AI’s hunger, Australian copyright is not yet an all-you-can-eat buffet for algorithm trainers.
Before you pop the champagne, let’s be clear why this is such a big deal.
In practice, photographers have faced these AI-related problems:
- Image scraping nightmares: Your work posted online is vacuumed up into huge “training sets” by AI developers. Suddenly that distinctive portrait or landscape ends up, pixel by pixel, mashed into something new (and, in some cases, suspiciously familiar), generated for pennies at the click of a button.
- Loss of control and revenue: If AI can create “stock” or “stylised” imitations—and get away with using your work as fuel—it undermines your ability to licence, sell, or enforce the originality of your own images.
- Uncertainty about legal recourse: Until now it’s been far from clear whether there’d be real consequences for AI companies that help themselves to the world’s creative output.
- Clients using “AI edit” tools: Everything from wedding composites to fashion advertising now touts AI-powered retouching, sometimes making it hard to know where an original ends and a machine’s “contribution” begins.
And let’s be honest: not everyone in Silicon Valley is losing sleep over the fate of freelance photographers in Fitzroy or Fremantle.
Let’s zoom in on what this actually means for you, and how it could change the day-to-day realities of being a photographer in the digital age:
Your copyright still belongs to you—if things go as currently planned.
If this government position stays in place, no company—no matter how clever its software—cannot simply scrape your photos from the web for machine learning without your explicit permission. If an AI business wants your images, they’ll have to ask (and yes, pay).
Contracts and licensing could matter more than ever.
Assuming that that this becomes law, we can expect to see more companies, agencies, and app developers to reach out seeking proper content licences for training “ethical AI.” Read the fine print before agreeing. Negotiate, set limits, and remember: if the law holds steady, the bargaining power remains in your hands.
If they use it without asking, you may still have rights.
Under current law, unauthorised copying or use is still copyright infringement. If you discover your images in an AI dataset or output (thanks to increasingly powerful reverse image search or crowd-sourced detective work), you may have grounds to push back—legally.
AI can imitate your style but if it doesn’t copy your actual work directly, it’s unlikely to be protected by copyright. However, if someone reproduces a substantial part of your photo or creative work without permission, that is an infringement under Australian law.
Australian law currently protects human creators, not robots.
If an image is generated entirely by a machine, with no meaningful human creative input, it may not be eligible for copyright protection at all.
Stay alert for future shifts.
While the government’s position is a win, debates are continuing so watch this space.
So, What’s a Photographer To Do?
First, don’t stop creating out of fear, but do be proactive:
- Watermark where possible.
- Keep records of originals and metadata.
- Read contracts carefully if approached about licensing work for AI.
- If you spot misuse, don’t hesitate to get professional legal advice.
Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and is not intended as legal advice. Every situation is different, and the law may change over time. If you have specific questions about copyright, AI, or your photography practice, you should seek advice from a qualified lawyer.
About the author: Sharon Givoni is a practising intellectual property and commercial lawyer in Australia and the author of the best-selling book Owning It: A Creative’s Guide to Copyright, Contracts and the Law. Her law firm, “Sharon Givoni Consulting”, advises photographers in all areas of the industry—from portrait and fashion to wedding, editorial, and wildlife photography.
Sharon also drafts custom terms and conditions for photographers. E info@iplegal.com.au Phone 0410 557 907
You can learn more at: