SYDNEY: Songs that are largely or entirely created using artificial intelligence have been banned from Australia’s official music charts under new rules introduced by the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA).
The new regulations came into effect this week and require music releases to be “substantially human made” to remain eligible for chart rankings.
ARIA said the changes were designed to protect and promote the human element of music-making at a time when generative AI is becoming increasingly common across the industry.
AI-Generated Music Ban Changes Chart Eligibility
Under the new AI-generated music ban, artists can still use artificial intelligence as part of their creative process, but human involvement must remain central to the finished work.
ARIA said songs must have been written by humans, while the lead vocals and primary instruments must also be performed by people.
This means AI tools can continue to assist musicians with certain aspects of production, composition or sound design, but releases that are largely created by AI will not qualify for the Australian charts.
The organisation said the policy was intended to reinforce the importance of human creativity and artistic expression.
The rule change follows controversy surrounding Australian DJ Josh Fawaz and his AI-assisted cover of Madonna’s Like A Prayer.
The track recently reached the top of the ARIA Dance Singles Chart and climbed as high as number two on Australia’s overall chart.
The song also became a regular feature on commercial radio playlists and has reportedly accumulated more than 48 million Spotify streams.
Fawaz later added generative AI credits to the track following criticism over the role artificial intelligence played in its creation.
The success of the song intensified debate over whether music created substantially with AI should compete directly with work produced by human musicians.
ARIA said Australian musicians are competing for attention in an increasingly crowded music market and argued that chart success should continue to recognise genuine human artistry.
The organisation said it was not interested in promoting or celebrating the success of music that does not contain meaningful human artistic input.
The new policy therefore aims to draw a clearer line between music where AI is used as a creative tool and music where artificial intelligence effectively creates the majority of the finished work.
The new regulations do not completely prohibit artificial intelligence from the music-making process.
Artists can continue using AI-assisted production tools, provided humans remain responsible for the core creative elements.
Under the rules, the song must be written by humans, while the lead vocalist and performers of the primary instruments must also be human.
The approach allows musicians to experiment with emerging technology without allowing fully or predominantly AI-generated releases to compete for chart positions.
Australia’s decision comes as the global music industry continues to debate how artificial intelligence should be used in songwriting, recording and production.
Generative AI can now create vocals, melodies, instrumental arrangements and complete tracks in a matter of minutes, raising questions about copyright, royalties, artist identity and chart eligibility.
Supporters argue that AI can provide musicians with new creative tools, while critics fear that large-scale AI-generated releases could overwhelm human artists and make it harder for musicians to compete for listeners.
ARIA’s new rules represent one of the clearest attempts by a major music-chart organisation to address the issue directly.
For Australian artists, the message is clear: AI can assist the creative process, but human artistry must remain at the heart of any song seeking chart recognition.
