Australia’s music industry has drawn a clearer line around generative AI, with ARIA ruling that recordings created wholly by AI will no longer be eligible for the country’s official music charts.
The new approach does not prohibit artists from using AI. AI-assisted recordings can remain eligible where the work is substantially human-made, the technology is used lawfully and there are no concerns about artificial manipulation of streams or chart results.
Key facts
- Wholly AI-generated recordings will no longer qualify for the ARIA Charts.
- AI-assisted recordings can remain eligible.
- Eligible recordings involving generative AI must be substantially human-made.
- AI use must comply with copyright and other applicable rights.
- ARIA can remove ineligible recordings retrospectively and adjust chart positions.
- Recordings ruled ineligible for the charts will also be ineligible for an ARIA Award.
- The changes apply from the ARIA Chart dated 31 August.
Our take
This is a useful example of a regulator or industry body avoiding an all-or-nothing approach to AI. ARIA is not saying that using generative AI makes creative work illegitimate. Instead, it is attempting to distinguish AI used as a tool by people from content generated essentially wholesale by AI.
That distinction could become increasingly important outside music. New Zealand organisations developing AI policies may face similar questions about when AI is assisting human work and when the AI system has effectively become the creator or decision-maker. Clear definitions, disclosure and human accountability will matter more as those boundaries become harder to see.
Sources
KiwiGen.AI 