They’re terrible, Muriel: Tech giants are robbing Australian authors blind

Everyone has a favourite moment from an iconic Australian film, one we quote to each other in everyday conversation. We tell each other, “You’re terrible, Muriel,” or that we’re off to Hammerbarn (from Bluey) rather than Bunnings. Or we’ll say, “It’s noice, it’s different, it’s un-you-sual.” Thank you, Kath & Kim.

We had an un-you-sual moment recently when Australian Google executive Lucinda Longcroft, while giving evidence to a Senate hearing about artificial intelligence, was interrupted by her chatbot (which had a male, American voice). It derailed the hearing and made national and international news, but it wasn’t the main cause for concern at the inquiry for Australian writers and other creatives, and not for some of us who’d already given evidence.

My members at the Australian Writers’ Guild create the screen properties we all love. If you’ve quoted a line from an Aussie film or TV show any time in the past 60 years, chances are a member of the guild wrote it. Unfortunately, all over the world unscrupulous big-tech companies are taking the work of creators – writers, composers, editors, voice actors, artists and designers – and copying it for the purpose of feeding an insatiable AI bubble.

There’s a long list of Australians whose names and works you would know who’ve had their work stolen by AI. They include Van Badham, bestselling author, prolific playwright and podcaster, and Benjamin Law, award-winning screenwriter, playwright, co-creator of a hit Netflix series, broadcaster and producer. Ben used a search tool published by The Atlantic to discover that his memoir, The Family Law, was among books worldwide that had been hoovered up by “Books3”. Van and Ben’s writing has been stolen to feed into an AI database. They aren’t credited, they aren’t paid, and they certainly weren’t asked for their permission.

And it makes everyone who uses the AI database complicit in the theft and bastardisation of Van and Ben’s works. Why pay them to create something when you can type into ChatGPT, “Write me a play that sounds like Van Badham”? The same goes for composers, visual artists, photographers, cinematographers and editors. We already have AI fake First Nations art on the market on sites such as eBay and Etsy.

“ChatGPT is a brilliant productivity tool, just as a library is a brilliant productivity tool,” Van tells me. “With far poorer technology, we worked out a system of acknowledgment and recompense for copyright holders used by library collections, and AI datasets are no different. The principle is the same and the obligation must be, too.”

In evidence to the Senate inquiry, Google and Amazon suggested material ingested by AI was taken from “publicly available” content or data. But just because it’s available to the public doesn’t mean it’s free, and it doesn’t mean someone doesn’t own it.

“Publicly available” can include pirated content. Or what about the content made available to the public by our public broadcasters, the ABC and SBS? Absolutely, it is available to us – because we pay for it as taxpayers. That isn’t the same as saying a foreign-owned company can take it and use it for its commercial gain.

The Senate hearing didn’t get a clear answer on just how these companies are deciding what’s “publicly available”, nor how artists are asked if their work can be used. So we’ve written to Google and Amazon, asking exactly what they are doing.

Last I counted, there are 30 or so copyright cases in the US against big-tech companies. That’s in a country with a notoriously permissive copyright system, so future cases here in Australia will be worth watching.

We asked the big-tech companies how our members (and other creative workers) might opt out of having a platform train its AI models on their work. We asked how they will be transparent with creatives about what’s happened with their work, and how they intend to pay them for it. We asked how they will avoid pirated works being used in AI. And we asked what is being done to safeguard First Nations stories and songs.

Australia has an enviable cultural canon. It’s not a free “input” for big tech. We’ll let you know when we hear back.

Claire Pullen is executive director of the Australian Writers Guild.

Get a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up for our Opinion newsletter.