Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallThe available evidence does not verify that Australian voters back a specific AI copyright change. The figures often cited in this debate come from surveys of authors, illustrators and Copyright Agency members—not a representative poll of Australian voters. Separately, the government has been examining ways to address AI training and copyright, and ABC reported in September 2026 on two consultation proposals that included opt-outs and possible payment for rights holders. Neither proposal is law or a confirmed government decision.
What the government is considering
In an October 2025 statement, the Australian Government said it was not considering a text and data mining (TDM) exception. Instead, it said it was examining whether to retain voluntary licensing or introduce paid collective licensing under the Copyright Act, how to clarify copyright rules for AI-generated material, and whether a small claims forum could make lower-value infringement disputes easier to pursue.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The Attorney-General’s Department describes the Copyright and Artificial Intelligence Reference Group (CAIRG) as a stakeholder process that informs policy advice. Its listed topics include licensing, legal certainty for AI-generated material, transparency and lower-cost enforcement. That process is not itself a change to copyright law.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →On 15 September 2026, ABC reported that confidential consultation slides had presented two proposals for using online material to train AI systems. Both included opt-outs, but they differed in how licensing and payment might work:
#1 Best Overall
| Reported option | How payment could work | What is established |
|---|---|---|
| Central or collective licensing | Payment through a central body or licensing deals with collecting groups. | ABC described this as a consultation proposal; details such as rates, eligibility and distribution were not settled in the report. |
| Deals with a minimum number of rights-holder companies | Use would depend on reaching deals with at least a specified minimum number of rights-holder companies. | ABC reported the model as a proposal. The report does not establish the final threshold or detailed terms. |
ABC also reported proposed safeguards: penalties for ignoring opt-outs, transparency and audits, protections for Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property, and best efforts to avoid training on pirated material. These were features described in the reported consultation options, not enacted requirements or a confirmed government decision.
What collective licensing could mean for creators
Under voluntary licensing, an AI developer negotiates directly with rights holders or their representatives. Collective licensing would allow a collecting organisation or central body to negotiate or administer permissions and payments for a group of works. That approach could offer a route to payment where negotiating individually is impractical, but its effect would depend on the final rules.
Rank #2
Important details remain open: which works and rights holders would qualify, how rates would be set, how creators could opt out, how usage would be reported, and how money would reach people who are not represented by a collecting group. The consultation report, as described by ABC, does not settle those questions. A workable system would also need a way for creators to identify uses, challenge incorrect records and seek a remedy when an opt-out or licence is disregarded.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
What creator surveys say—and what they do not
The survey figures offer evidence about the views of particular creator groups, not the electorate. The Australian Society of Authors said its 2025 survey included 928 authors and illustrators. Among those respondents, 98% wanted AI companies to seek permission to use their work for training; nearly 85% wanted credit; 92% wanted compensation for past use without consent; and 93% expected payment if they consented to licensing.
Copyright Agency’s December 2024 report described a survey completed by 1,304 of its members. In that group, 86% supported a law or mechanism to compensate Australians whose material was used in offshore AI development. Seventy per cent said they would be more supportive of Australian generative AI development if creators were compensated for overseas use.
Those results show strong support for permission, credit or compensation among the surveyed respondents. They cannot establish what Australian voters overall think, because the respondents were creators or collecting-agency members rather than a representative sample of voters. The commissioning body, sample, fieldwork dates, question wording and result for the voter poll implied by the headline have not been verified.
Rank #4
The policy trade-off is not settled
The Productivity Commission’s 2025 report describes the effects of AI training on creator incomes and the development of licensing markets as uncertain. It discusses several possible approaches: a fair-dealing TDM exception, extended collective licensing, or waiting to see whether voluntary licensing develops. It says compensated mechanisms could be considered if uncompensated training substantially reduces creator incomes, while warning that intervention could distort licensing markets.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →That leaves policymakers weighing more than whether payment is desirable. A system would need to balance access to material for AI development against creators’ control and income, and consider whether payment can be distributed accurately without making licensing harder to negotiate. Transparency, cultural protections and affordable enforcement are also practical questions, not just policy labels.
What can be said about the headline
Creator surveys provide a reason to examine compensation and licensing, and government consultations have explored possible models. But the evidence here does not substantiate a claim that Australian voters back a particular change. The reported proposals remain proposals, and the creator surveys should not be presented as voter polling. Until a verifiable poll is available, the electorate’s view on the specific options remains unknown.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
