For First Nations artists, the spread of AI-generated imitations risks further weakening control over cultural work and the income it can provide. Indigenous artists earn just $1,800 a year on average, according to a 2022 Productivity Commission report.
Scales says AI systems are taking First Nations art, altering it and turning it into “Temu slop”. Terri Janke, a lawyer specialising in Indigenous cultural and intellectual property, has documented systems scraping Indigenous art centre websites, removing artists’ names and changing their work.
Sally Scales, a Pitjantjatjara artist and chair of the National Gallery of Australia’s First Nations advisory group, has become a public voice on the issue. She describes the practice as “a theft” of cultural knowledge that erodes artists’ agency and the authenticity of their work.
“It’s a theft of the agency of the artist. It rips the authenticity out of it, because it’s not been made by anyone who has the connection … the artist’s family lineage is not there, the lived experience is not there,” Scales said.
The dispute has grown from a longstanding fight over the reproduction and sale of fake “Indigenous” art. More than 60 per cent of the $250 million annual Australian Indigenous-style souvenir market is fake, a 2022 Productivity Commission investigation found. First Nations artists have long challenged that trade, and AI is making the problem worse.
Searches of Temu, Shein and Amazon show countless works described as Aboriginal paintings, along with goods carrying Aboriginal-style designs, largely without any artist attribution. The listings include items such as coasters and stubby holders.
For Chern’ee Sutton, a Kalkadoon woman from Mount Isa in North-West Queensland, the concern was personal. Sutton and her sister Brooke found AI versions of Brooke’s art being sold online by an Australian website.
Dr Louise Buckingham, chief executive of the Arts Law Centre of Australia, said the counterfeiting of Aboriginal art was now “on steroids” because of AI. Buckingham oversees the country’s only community legal centre supporting artists and has called for urgent government regulation, describing the practice as “a denial of sovereignty and self-determination.”
Janke, who is Wuthathi and Meriam, has also warned that AI can reproduce cultural knowledge without regard for accuracy or appropriate use. Prof Kathy Bowrey of UNSW Law said an organisation might pay to use artwork of Aboriginal people, then use AI later to “update” or repurpose the images without permission. Bowrey has said AI amplifies copyright infringement, a problem already faced by one in five creators.
Birrunga, a Wiradyuri artist, said: “An AI piece is not art. It’s decoration, illustration at best. It doesn’t have cultural content.” Elysia Love-Anderson, a Kamilaroi artist, said: “AI cannot give a piece what we can. Knowledge that has been passed down from family, from elders, down multiple generations. It’s just fake.”
The National Association for the Visual Arts’ 2025 survey found over 80 per cent of Australian visual artists believed AI posed risks to their income, practice and moral rights. More than half of respondents backed enforceable regulation or legislation for protection.
Bowrey and associate professor Oliver Bown have proposed a Copyright Plus framework. It would require AI companies to reveal their data sources and give artists the right to refuse the scraping or imitation of their work.
Penelope Benton, executive director of the National Association for the Visual Arts, said: “Artists should not have to take on multinational technology companies to protect their own work. They’re already dealing with rising costs, low incomes and limited funding. The Australian Government needs to put the responsibility on AI companies to obtain permission and pay for the work they use.”
The federal government pledged in 2023 $13.4 million over four years to help develop legislation protecting Indigenous traditional knowledge and cultural expressions. A spokesperson for the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts told National Indigenous Times that the government has no data on how commonly AI is being used to copy Indigenous Australian art.
Comments (0)