MELBOURNE, Australia – In a landmark move to protect human artists and the integrity of official music rankings, Australia’s peak recorded music industry body has announced it will bar fully artificial intelligence-generated tracks from its flagship charts and annual awards, effective next Monday.
The policy shift comes amid heated global conversation around generative AI’s role in creative industries, sparked by a viral AI-modified version of Madonna’s 1989 hit *Like a Prayer* that has held a spot on Australia’s top 20 singles chart for 16 consecutive weeks. Created by an Australian producer who used AI to generate new vocals and drum tracks for the song, the adapted version climbed to No. 2 on the Australian Record Industry Association (ARIA) Australian Singles Chart in May and still held the No. 4 position as of the announcement date Tuesday.
Under the new rules, only music that meets strict human-led creative criteria will qualify for ARIA charts and the prestigious ARIA Awards. Eligible tracks must feature songwriting, lead vocals, and primary instrumental performance completed by human creators, and any AI tools used in production must be licensed legally. The update allows for music that uses AI as an assistive tool, so long as human creators retain core creative control. Fully AI-generated compositions and performances will be completely excluded from ranking and award consideration.
ARIA chief executive Annabelle Herd framed the policy change as a necessary update for a fast-evolving creative landscape. “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. She emphasized that the ARIA charts exist to serve as an accurate, transparent reflection of Australian music consumption, noting that allowing unlicensed, fully AI-generated work to compete would undermine the core mission of supporting recorded music created by human artists.
The new Australian rules align with global industry standards established in July by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), a London-based organization that represents recording industry interests across 70 countries. The IFPI’s global guidelines already require all chart-eligible tracks to be “substantially human made,” matching ARIA’s new framework.
Industry reaction to the announcement has been largely supportive, though many note the broader debate over AI in music remains deeply divided. Alexis Weaver, a composer and lecturer at the Sydney Conservatorium of Music, described the conversation around AI-generated music as “exceptionally fraught and very emotional for a lot of musicians” given the growing threat of unlicensed AI tools trained on artists’ original work without permission. Weaver applauded ARIA’s policy as a “wonderful step forward” that sends a clear signal the industry prioritizes human creative labor.
Weaver added that the new rule strikes a reasonable balance for modern music production, noting that AI tools have become increasingly common in creative workflows. “It can be quite hard to avoid AI tools in the current landscape,” she said. “There is a way to use it while you’re still steering the ship and making the main creative choices.”
The policy change comes as creative industries worldwide grapple with the impact of generative AI, which has lowered barriers to music production but sparked widespread concerns over copyright infringement, unfair competition, and the displacement of human creators.