🔍 Read the full analysis: What The AI Copyright Dispute In Indonesia Means For Tech on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get business pricing on office and shipping supplies
- Business-only prices and quantity discounts
- Tax-exempt purchasing
- Multiple users, one account, clear invoices
TL;DR
Google, Meta and TikTok raised objections to Indonesia’s draft copyright-law revision at a Nov. 11 parliamentary hearing. The proposal covers payments for news links and previews, AI training on copyrighted works, creator-style imitation and disclosure, but it is not law and the current draft text and vote schedule remain unclear.
Google, Meta and TikTok challenged parts of Indonesia’s proposed copyright-law revision at a parliamentary hearing in Jakarta on November 11, focusing on payments for displaying news and rules for artificial-intelligence training and content. The bill remains under discussion, not law, and could set requirements for major platforms and AI developers operating in Indonesia.
The proposal would revise Indonesia’s Copyright Law No. 28 of 2014. Parliament approved it as a legislative initiative on March 12, 2026, and its Legislation Body, known as Baleg, is deliberating it with the government. Reuters reported on an earlier draft in July; the text has since changed, and the complete version discussed at the latest hearing was not available in the supplied reporting.
According to Reuters’ account of the July draft, platforms could have to compensate publishers when they aggregate, republish or display news, including through link previews, and when they use news for AI training. Payments would go through state-supervised collective management organizations. The draft also addressed whether AI-created or AI-assisted works qualify for copyright protection, disclosure of AI use, imitation of a creator’s distinctive style and conditions for training on copyrighted material. The July version proposed sanctions for noncompliance, potentially including revocation of local business permits.
At the November hearing, Google objected to payments tied to indexing, aggregation and news snippets, and to mandatory licensing of AI training data. It also called for safe-harbor protections for platforms and proposed a text-and-data-mining exception with an opt-out mechanism, such as robots.txt, according to accounts cited in the source material. Meta argued that sharing a link is not the same as republishing an article and said payment duties could reduce publishers’ traffic and revenue. TikTok said AI disclosure should not be required when AI is used only as an assistive tool, and supported retaining safe-harbor protections.
AI Copyright Dispute What Tech Needs to Know
Google, Meta and TikTok challenged a proposed copyright-law revision at a November 11 parliamentary hearing. The bill remains under discussion and is not law.
What the proposal covers
The draft links news distribution and AI use of copyrighted works in one copyright-law revision.
Payments for links
The July draft would require compensation for news aggregation, republication, previews and some AI training uses.
Licenses or exceptions
Unsettled rules could determine whether training on protected works needs a license or can be opted out of.
Disclosure and authorship
The draft also addresses AI disclosure, creator-style imitation and how much human input earns copyright protection.
Three platforms, different concerns
- Google challenged payments for indexing, aggregation and snippets, plus mandatory AI-training licenses.
- Meta said sharing a link is not republication and payment rules could reduce publisher traffic and revenue.
- TikTok said disclosure should not be required when AI is used only as an assistive tool.
- It supported retaining safe-harbor protections.
Why the details matter
The final wording could change how businesses distribute news and build AI products in Indonesia.
Payment duties could change link previews, news indexing and audience referrals.
Compensation may offer a revenue route, while platform changes could affect reach.
Licensing, exceptions and opt-outs could shape training data and AI-assisted content.
What remains unclear
- The complete current draft text and settled wording are unavailable.
- Reports cite different versions, so specific provisions remain provisional.
- No parliamentary vote date has been announced.
- Fee setting, payment distribution and dispute handling are not established.
Rules Could Reshape News and AI
The proposed rules concern two connected parts of the digital economy: how platforms distribute journalism and how AI systems use copyrighted material. If a final law requires payment for link previews or aggregation, platforms may change how they display or route Indonesian news. Google warned lawmakers, according to Reuters, that a levy on links could leave it with “no choice” but to stop crawling, indexing and distributing Indonesian news. That is the company’s stated position, not a confirmed outcome of the bill.
For publishers, the legislation could create a new route to compensation. The Press Council, Dewan Pers, told lawmakers that platforms take 80 percent of digital advertising and that traffic from platforms to news sites has fallen by up to 70 percent, according to the source material. Those figures are the council’s claims; the supplied account does not specify the measurement periods or comparison baselines. The disagreement is consequential: a payment system might deliver revenue to publishers, while platform changes could affect referrals and audience reach.
For AI developers and creators, the unresolved terms could determine whether training on protected works requires a license, falls under an exception, or can be prevented through an opt-out. Definitions of human contribution and disclosure would also affect creators using AI tools and businesses releasing AI-assisted content. The outcome matters beyond Indonesia as a test of how a large market may balance copyright holders’ interests, AI development and platform distribution.
Popular right now
LG StanbyME 2 Max 32-Inch 4K Portable Smart Touchscreen TV
Breville Barista Express Espresso Machine with Grinder, Black Truffle
De'Longhi Stilosa Compact Manual Espresso Machine with Milk Frother
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
A Draft With Changing Terms
Indonesia already has a policy requiring digital platforms to support quality journalism: Presidential Regulation No. 32 of 2024. At the November hearing, Dewan Pers deputy chair Totok Suryanto said the regulation had not worked as intended and platform compliance remained low, according to Aktual. The proposed copyright revision would address platform compensation through a separate legal framework.
The AI provisions first reported by Reuters on July 17 came from a draft whose authenticity was confirmed by Hermansyah Siregar, a law ministry official overseeing intellectual property. He said it would mark the first explicit recognition of AI in Indonesia’s copyright law, while stressing that the text was not final. The July version proposed that AI-assisted works qualify for protection only when they met human-involvement criteria, but did not specify how much human contribution would be required.
At the November hearing, Google referred to draft Articles 29 and 30 as requiring payment for indexing, aggregation, curation and news snippets, according to Suara. Because the full current text was unavailable and reports refer to different versions, those article numbers and provisions should be treated as provisional rather than settled language.
“A levy on links would leave Google with “no choice” but to stop crawling, indexing and distributing Indonesian news.”
— Google representative Agung Pamungkas, as reported by Reuters
Key Provisions Still Unsettled
The current draft text was not available in the supplied reporting, and the proposal has changed since July. It is not clear what wording lawmakers are now considering on link payments, AI training, safe harbors, disclosure or the threshold of human involvement needed for copyright protection. Reports also cite different versions, making detailed provisions—including article numbers—provisional.
The available information does not give a date for a parliamentary vote. It also does not establish how any collective licensing system would set fees, distribute payments, handle disagreements or interact with existing agreements. The companies’ objections and the Press Council’s figures are attributed positions presented at the hearing, not settled findings about the law’s likely effects.
Parliamentary Deliberations Continue
Baleg and the government are continuing to deliberate the bill. The next key development will be publication or reporting of a stable draft that clarifies the proposed obligations, exceptions, enforcement and treatment of AI training. The source material gives no announced vote date, so the timing of a decision remains unknown.
Until lawmakers settle the wording and approve the measure, the proposal should not be treated as a rule currently governing platform payments or AI training. Publishers, creators and technology companies will be watching for revisions and further hearings, particularly on whether platforms must pay for links, whether training uses require licenses, and what protections or opt-outs the law would recognize.
Key Questions
Has Indonesia passed the AI copyright bill?
No. The proposal is still being deliberated by parliament’s Legislation Body and the government. It is not yet law.
What did Google, Meta and TikTok object to?
Google challenged payments for news links and snippets, mandatory AI-training licenses and the proposed licensing structure, and called for safe-harbor protections. Meta said links are not republication and argued payment rules could harm publishers’ traffic and revenue. TikTok said disclosure should not cover AI used only as assistance and supported retaining safe harbor.
What AI rules could the bill introduce?
An earlier draft addressed AI-use disclosure, copyright for AI-assisted works, imitation of a creator’s distinctive style and the use of copyrighted works for AI training through fair-use provisions or licensing. The current wording is not confirmed because the draft has changed.
When will parliament vote on the bill?
No vote date has been announced in the available source material. Deliberations are ongoing, and a stable current draft has not been obtained.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
