The Australian Government Just Proposed Letting AI Train on Your Business Content — Without Asking

Leaked internal government documents, published yesterday by the ABC, show the Attorney-General’s Department has been exploring whether to let AI companies train on Australian creators’ content, by default, without permission, unless those creators actively opt out.

The documents are titled “AI on Australian Terms.” The framing is diplomatic. The implications aren’t.

If this becomes law, your website copy, your blog posts, your product descriptions, your case studies, all of it would be available to AI companies to train on, unless you take deliberate steps to stop it. Most small business owners don’t know this conversation is happening. That’s the problem.

What “opt-out by default” actually means for your business

Right now, under existing Australian copyright law, you own what you create. If someone wants to use it commercially, including to train an AI, they need your permission. That’s the legal baseline.

What these proposals would do is flip that. Your content would be considered available unless you say otherwise. The burden shifts from AI companies to you.

Think about what that means in practice. A small business owner running a café in Geelong, a tradie with a few service pages, a freelance copywriter with a portfolio, none of them have a legal team or the time to file opt-out notices. Under an opt-out regime, their content gets swept up by default.

Senator David Pocock put it directly: “This would be huge and mean that our legal system would protect AI companies first and Australians second.”

That’s the architecture of what’s being proposed.

We’ve written previously about what Australia’s AI copyright fight means for SMBs and how AU government AI policy affects your small business, but this leak moves that conversation from theory to active policy drafting.

The two options on the table, in plain language

The leaked documents outline two approaches. Neither requires AI companies to ask first.

Option A, Collective licensing with payment: AI companies pay into a central body. In exchange, they get a blanket licence to train on any content that hasn’t been opted out of. Some money reaches creators eventually, through whatever distribution mechanism the central body sets up. How much, and how quickly? The documents don’t say.

Option B, Direct deals, no broader payment: AI companies negotiate deals with a minimum number of rights holders, publishers, industry bodies, large platforms. Once those deals are done, they get blanket access to everything else that hasn’t opted out. No additional payment goes to the creators whose work is actually being used.

Option B is the worse outcome for small business owners. You’d be covered by a licence you didn’t agree to, negotiated by parties who may not represent you, with no compensation flowing your way.

Even Option A isn’t clean. “Pays into a central body” sounds reasonable until you ask who runs it, how money gets distributed, and whether a sole trader with a website has any realistic path to seeing any of it.

For context: OpenAI VP Ann O’Leary told the government, “We will not be able to build a training centre here if the copyright law is as it exists.” That’s a lobbying position, not a neutral observation. Treasury documents obtained through FOI also show Anthropic described its Australian investment as “contingent” on copyright clarity. These companies want certainty, and the certainty they’re pushing for comes at the expense of creators’ existing rights.

For a deeper look at the legal foundations at stake, see who owns AI-generated content under Australian copyright law and the broader AI copyright picture for Australian businesses in 2026.

What you should do right now

This policy isn’t final. The documents are a proposal stage, not legislation. There’s still time to shape the outcome, but “waiting to see what happens” is itself a choice, and not a good one.

1. Add a robots.txt directive blocking AI crawlers. It’s not legally binding in all jurisdictions, but it signals intent and blocks the compliant ones. Several major AI companies now respect it. Add User-agent: GPTBot and Disallow: / as a starting point, then expand to other bots.

2. Add a terms of use notice to your website. Explicitly state that your content is not licensed for AI training. Again, not a silver bullet, but it creates a paper trail and may matter if an opt-out mechanism is eventually formalised.

3. Make a submission. The Australian government does accept public submissions on copyright reform. When the formal consultation opens, use it. Industry bodies like the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia (COSBOA) are already watching this. Joining a relevant association puts you in the conversation.

4. Keep an eye on the Senate’s work on AI training rules. The cross-bench, including Pocock, has shown it’s willing to push back. That matters.

Deputy PM Richard Marles said the government “need[s] to be doing it in a way which protects rights holders.” Whether that intention survives contact with lobbyists is the question worth watching.

The moment opt-out by default becomes the law, the burden is yours. Getting ahead of it now is better than scrambling after.

If this interests you

• Your Legacy Software Is the AI Hacker’s Best Friend
• Australian Business Leaders Just Weighed In on the AI Slowdown. Here’s What It Means for You.
• When the AI Rivals All Agree, Pay Attention

More hot takes: Hot Takes →

Sources

• ABC News, Cameron Wilson: Leaked government documents reveal AI training proposal (15 Sep 2026)
• Australian Government, “AI on Australian Terms” (internal documents, via ABC)
• Treasury FOI documents re: Anthropic investment (via ABC)

📖 More deep dives: News Deep Dives

📊 Compare AI tools side by side | 💼 Free resources & AI prompt packs

: News Deep Dives →

More hot takes: Hot Takes →