🔍 Read the full analysis: What’s Driving The Debate Over Indonesia’s AI Copyright Bill? 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 proposed copyright-law revision at a parliamentary hearing on Nov. 11, focusing on payments for news links, AI training rules and platform liability. The bill is still under deliberation, its current text was not available for review, and no vote date has been announced.
Google, Meta and TikTok objected to parts of Indonesia’s proposed copyright-law overhaul at a parliamentary hearing in Jakarta on Nov. 11, arguing over payments for news links, AI training and platform protections. The revision is being considered by the House of Representatives’ Legislation Body and the government; it has not become law, and lawmakers have not announced a vote date.
The proposal would revise Indonesia’s Copyright Law, Law No. 28 of 2014. Parliament approved it as a legislative initiative on March 12, 2026, and it is now under deliberation. The Nov. 11 hearing included representatives of Google, Meta, TikTok, the Press Council and Satu Lisensi Indonesia, according to Kompas.
The draft version Reuters reported in July would require platforms to compensate news publishers when they aggregate, republish or display news, including through link previews, and for using news content to train AI. It also proposed rules on whether AI can imitate a creator’s distinctive style, when AI use must be disclosed, and what qualifies as a copyright-protected AI-assisted work. That July text is not necessarily the version now before lawmakers.
At the hearing, Google opposed payment duties tied to showing news links and snippets, a single collective licensing body and mandatory licenses covering AI training data. It also called for platform safe-harbor protections and a text-and-data-mining exception with an opt-out, such as robots.txt, according to accounts by Suara and Kompas. Meta argued that sharing a link is not the same as republishing and said payment requirements could reduce publisher traffic and revenue. TikTok said disclosure should not be required when AI merely assists a person and also called for safe-harbor protection.
What’s driving the debate over Indonesia’s AI copyright bill?
Platforms, publishers and lawmakers are debating payment for news use and rules for AI training. The bill remains under deliberation.
What the debate covers
The proposal could shape how creative work is paid for and used by digital platforms and AI developers.
Payment for links
The reported draft would require compensation when platforms display or use news, including link previews.
Training and authorship
Reported provisions address training data, AI disclosure and protection for AI-assisted work.
Liability and licensing
Companies raised questions about safe harbors, collective licensing and opt-outs.
Companies’ objections
Google, Meta and TikTok outlined different concerns at the hearing.
- Google opposed fees tied to news links and mandatory AI-training licenses.
- Google and TikTok called for platform safe-harbor protections.
- TikTok opposed disclosure when AI only assists a person.
- Meta said sharing a link is not the same as republishing.
- It argued payment rules could reduce publisher traffic and revenue.
Why the outcome matters
The eventual rules could affect the flow of news and the material available to AI developers.
The bill could set terms for compensation and control over uses of their work.
It could determine whether AI training needs licenses or qualifies for an exception.
Rules on news links could influence how people find Indonesian journalism online.
What remains uncertain
The July draft described in reporting may not match the text lawmakers are reviewing.
- The full current bill text was not available for review.
- AI human-involvement tests and permitted training uses remain unsettled.
- No vote date has been announced, and the proposal is not law.
The Dispute Over Links and Training Data
The debate puts two related questions before lawmakers: how publishers and creators should be paid when platforms use or display their work, and how copyright rules should apply to AI systems trained on large collections of material. The answers could affect news distribution, licensing arrangements and the data available to AI developers operating in Indonesia.
Google warned lawmakers that a levy on links could leave it with “no choice” but to stop crawling, indexing and distributing Indonesian news, Reuters reported. That is the company’s stated position, not a confirmed outcome. Meta, for its part, contended that payment duties could cost publishers visits and income. The Press Council offered a different account of the current balance: it told lawmakers that platforms take 80 percent of digital advertising and that traffic from platforms to news sites has fallen by as much as 70 percent. Those figures were presented by the council; the material available does not establish their measurement period or method.
For creators and publishers, the bill could set terms for compensation and control over uses of their work. For platforms and AI developers, it could determine whether training requires individual or collective licenses, or whether an exception applies. The precise effects depend on the final text, how it is enforced and whether lawmakers retain the provisions companies challenged.
Popular right now
Vitamix VX1 Professional-Grade Blender, 64 oz, Black
Bose QuietComfort True Wireless Earbuds with Active Noise Cancellation, Bluetooth 5.3, USB-C Charging, and IPX4 Water Resistance
Bose QuietComfort Wireless Noise-Cancelling Over-Ear Headphones, Twilight Blue
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From July Draft to November Hearing
Indonesia already has a policy requiring digital platforms to support quality journalism. Presidential Regulation No. 32 of 2024 established that requirement. Dewan Pers deputy chair Totok Suryanto told lawmakers that compliance has been low and the regulation has not worked as intended, according to Aktual. The copyright bill would address compensation through a separate legislative framework.
Reuters reported the bill’s AI provisions on July 17, citing a draft whose authenticity law ministry intellectual-property official Hermansyah Siregar confirmed. He said the draft was not final. As described in that report, it would protect AI-assisted works only if they met a human-involvement threshold, while excluding fully AI-generated works; the draft did not specify how much human contribution would be required. It also contemplated disclosure of AI use and fair-use rules or licensing for copyrighted training material.
By the Nov. 11 hearing, Google referred to draft Articles 29 and 30 as requiring payment for news indexing, aggregation, curation and snippet displays, according to Suara. The full text under discussion was not available, and reporting has cited different versions. Those article numbers and the July provisions should not be treated as settled descriptions of the bill.
“The development of generative AI has disrupted the copyright framework.”
— Hermansyah Siregar, a law ministry official overseeing intellectual property, as quoted by Reuters
Key Draft Terms Remain Unsettled
The bill’s current wording is not confirmed in full. The available reporting describes a July draft and comments at the November hearing, but the draft has changed and a complete version under discussion could not be obtained. It is not clear which provisions will remain, how any human-involvement test for AI-assisted work would operate, or how the bill would define permitted training uses.
It also remains unclear whether lawmakers will adopt a single collective licensing system, an opt-out mechanism, platform safe harbors or sanctions such as permit revocation. Companies’ statements describe their objections and proposals; they do not establish the final policy. No vote date was announced in the source material.
Lawmakers Continue Bill Deliberations
The Legislation Body and the government are expected to continue reviewing the revision after hearing from platforms, press representatives and licensing groups. No timetable for a vote has been announced, and the hearing does not settle the final shape of the bill.
The next meaningful developments will be publication or confirmation of the text under deliberation, further committee discussions and any announced schedule for a parliamentary vote. Until then, proposed rules and company responses should be read as part of an ongoing legislative debate, not as requirements already in force.
Key Questions
Has Indonesia passed the AI copyright bill?
No. The proposal is still under deliberation by parliament’s Legislation Body and the government. No vote date was announced in the source material.
What are the main issues in the proposal?
The draft versions described in reporting address payments to news publishers for platform use of news, copyright rules for AI training, disclosure of AI use, and protection for works made with AI assistance.
Why are Google, Meta and TikTok objecting?
The companies raised different concerns. Google challenged payments for links and snippets, mandatory AI-training licenses and a single licensing body; Meta argued links are not republication and said payment rules could affect publisher traffic; TikTok opposed disclosure for AI used only as assistance. These are the companies’ stated positions.
What would the draft say about AI-generated work?
Reuters’ July account of an earlier draft said AI-assisted works would need to meet a human-involvement test and fully AI-generated works would not qualify for protection. The test was not defined, and the text has since changed, so the provisions may not reflect the current draft.
When could parliament vote on the bill?
No vote date has been announced. The bill remains under deliberation, and the full current text was not available in the source material.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
