Australia has banned music created entirely by artificial intelligence from its official music charts and annual industry awards, following growing concerns over the impact of AI on human creativity and copyright.
The Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA) announced the new rules on Tuesday, saying fully AI-generated recordings would become ineligible for its charts from Friday.
However, songs in which artificial intelligence is used only as a supporting or creative tool will remain eligible.
Under the new system, music will be classified as “AI-Generated” when artificial intelligence produces all or most of a recording’s creative elements, while “AI-Assisted” will apply where AI is used for only selected expressive elements.
ARIA said it would adopt a labelling framework recently introduced by music industry organisations to assess the extent of artificial intelligence used in recordings.
ARIA Chief Executive Annabelle Herd said the organisation wanted its charts to accommodate legitimate technological developments while ensuring that entirely AI-produced music did not gain recognition at the expense of human artists.
“These changes reflect our intent to remain dynamic and promote the human nature of artistry in what is to say the least a rapidly developing space,” Herd said.
The decision followed controversy surrounding an AI-heavy cover of Madonna’s 1989 hit, Like a Prayer, by Brisbane-based DJ Josh Fawaz.
The track, which features AI-generated vocals and drums, reached the top of ARIA’s Top 20 Australian Dance Singles Chart, triggering debate among musicians, producers and fans over the growing role of artificial intelligence in music production.
Fawaz acknowledged using AI in the recording after initially facing questions over the extent of human involvement in the production. The song has reportedly amassed more than 48.5 million streams on Spotify and remains at the top of the Australian dance chart.
Fawaz welcomed the new ARIA policy, describing it as “a great move”, while maintaining that artificial intelligence can be a legitimate creative tool for musicians.
The controversy has intensified a broader debate within the global music industry over copyright, ownership and the use of human-created recordings to train AI systems.
Oliver Bown, an associate professor at the University of New South Wales who researches technology and art, said the rapid development of AI-generated music required greater scrutiny.
He warned that some commercial AI music companies may be exploiting artists by using copyrighted material without permission to train their systems.
Bown acknowledged that musicians could use AI responsibly but cautioned that the technology could also be used to mass-produce music primarily for streaming revenue.
Ivan Zavada, a senior lecturer in composition and music technology at the University of Sydney, described ARIA’s decision as an important step towards protecting human creativity and performance.
He said further work was needed on copyright and intellectual property rules to provide greater clarity and confidence around the use of AI in music production.
Despite the concerns, Zavada said artificial intelligence was likely to become an increasingly important part of the music industry, describing the sector as being in a significant period of technological change.
ARIA, whose members include Sony Music Entertainment Australia and Universal Music Australia, publishes more than two dozen weekly charts, including Australia’s major singles and albums rankings.
The new policy makes Australia one of the latest markets to draw a distinction between music created by humans with AI assistance and recordings in which artificial intelligence is responsible for most or all of the creative work.
