When artist Stephen Cornwell first started making digital art, it was exciting and new.
“I realised how messy paint was, and that I could travel with my artwork without having oil paints,” Cornwell told SBS News.
Using the graphic design and photo editing software Photoshop, Cornwell would spend months labouring over a single image. His hard work paid off, and in 2021 he was nominated for the prestigious Blake Prize.
But today, Cornwell fears his work is becoming impossible to tell apart from generative AI. He says these days making digital art is a “lost cause”.
“It’s assumed everything I do is AI,” he said.
“Any school-age kid can use [generative AI] and get extraordinary results. But the results are built on the backbone of those who originally created the work themselves.
“It’s theft.”
Artist Stephen Cornwell’s image Angel-Fish was created without the use of artificial intelligence. Source: Supplied / Stephen Cornwell
What is the Productivity Commission proposing?
Cornwell has concerns about a proposal by a government body to scale back copyright laws so that content can be fed into AI models without compensation.
An interim report from the Productivity Commission has proposed that big tech companies have greater access to work such as that of Cornwell’s, and other Australian creative professionals, in the form of datasets to train AI models.
Artists, especially those working with digital technology, say that artificial intelligence devalues their art and that the proposed changes would make it even harder to earn a living.
Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers says harnessing artificial intelligence can provide a huge boost to the Australian economy. Source: AAP / Lukas Coch
The recommendation is part of the Commission’s proposed roadmap to “harnessing data and the digital economy”. It suggests the Copyright Act could be amended so that content — such as videos, images and music — can be mined without permission or compensation under “fair dealing” provisions.
Under the current law, “fair dealing” exceptions apply to copyrighted material that is used for things such as research or study, parody or satire, or reporting the news. Exceptions for text and data mining under “fair dealing” are in place in countries such as the United Kingdom and also the European Union.
The interim report also recommends the government re-think plans to put mandatory guardrails on high-risk AI, and that AI-specific regulation should be used as a last resort.
It estimates that AI could provide a $116 billion boost to Australia’s economy.
‘Making infringement legal’
Louise Buckingham, CEO of Community Legal Centre Arts Law, is concerned the proposed change is a “get out of jail free card” for wealthy tech companies.
“The Productivity Commission’s recommendation is all about recognising infringement is incurring and making it legal rather than enforcing it.”
Buckingham said more artists are coming to the centre with concerns that AI is making it harder to make a living in the arts.
“It’s not just about what someone can sell their work for its about what someone can be employed for, and how much they can invest,” she said.
Nicola Grayson, head of public affairs at Creative Australia, said AI, and in particular generative AI, is the “big disruptor in the cultural and creative sector”.
Grayson said copyright law in Australia was robust and policymakers should be looking to enforce it rather than walk it back.
Creative Australia made a submission to the report and Grayson says it will be following up with the Productivity Commission and the tech sector to make sure everyone is benefiting from AI.
‘Realistic’ about AI risks
The interim report was released ahead of Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ economic reform round table later this month, which is seeking ways to boost the country’s productivity.
On Wednesday, Chalmers told a press conference that he is: “optimistic that AI can be a force for good, but I’m also realistic about the risks”.
Speaking to ABC News Breakfast on Wednesday, Industry and Science Minister Tim Ayres said the government has “no plans to make changes” in relation to Australian copyright law.
Meanwhile, Opposition leader Sussan Ley said she is concerned about the report’s lack of “guardrails to prevent big tech stealing the hard-earned products of our content creators”.
“It is not appropriate for big tech to steal the work of Australian artists, musicians, creators, news media, journalism, and use it for their own ends without paying for it,” she said on Wednesday.
The Productivity Commission is asking for feedback before it releases its final recommendations later in the year.
