🔍 Read the full analysis: A Closer Look At Indonesia’s AI Copyright Bill And Big Tech’s Response on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Prime made for students and young adults
- Fast, free delivery for dorm and study essentials
- Prime Video and Amazon Music included
- Member-only deals
TL;DR
Google, Meta and TikTok raised objections to Indonesia’s proposed copyright-law revision at a parliamentary hearing on Nov. 11, 2026. The draft would address payments for news content and rules for AI-created and AI-assisted work, but its current text is unavailable and it has not become law.
Google, Meta and TikTok objected to parts of Indonesia’s proposed copyright-law revision at a parliamentary hearing in Jakarta on Nov. 11, 2026, as lawmakers consider rules covering payments for news content and the use of copyrighted work in artificial intelligence. The proposal remains a draft, and the full version discussed at the hearing was not available.
The revision would amend Copyright Law No. 28 of 2014. Parliament approved it as an initiative on March 12, 2026, and its Legislation Body, known as Baleg, is now deliberating it with the government. According to reporting by Reuters, the draft would require platforms to compensate news publishers when they aggregate or republish news, display link previews, or use news content for AI training. The July version described by Reuters proposed that payments be distributed through state-supervised collective management organisations.
The bill also addresses whether AI can imitate a creator’s distinctive style, when AI use must be disclosed, and what protection applies to AI-assisted works. Reuters reported that a July draft would protect works only when they met human-involvement criteria, while excluding fully AI-generated works. It did not specify how much human input would qualify. The same version placed use of copyrighted material for AI training under fair-use provisions or licensing agreements. Because the draft has changed, those details should not be treated as settled provisions.
At the Nov. 11 hearing, Google challenged payments tied to links and snippets, mandatory licensing through a single collective body, and compulsory licenses for AI training data, according to reports by Suara and Kompas. Meta argued that sharing a link is not the same as republishing an article and said payment rules could reduce publishers’ traffic and revenue. TikTok objected to disclosure requirements for AI used only as an assistant and, like Google, called for intermediary protections. The Press Council and Satu Lisensi Indonesia also attended, Kompas reported.
AI copyright bill faces Big Tech objections
Google, Meta and TikTok challenged parts of Indonesia’s proposed copyright revision at a Nov. 11 parliamentary hearing. The bill is still a draft, and the current text is unavailable.
What the proposal covers
The revision would address payments for news content and copyright rules for AI use.
Platform payments
The draft could require compensation when platforms aggregate, republish, preview or use news for AI training.
Creator protections
It addresses AI imitation, disclosure and protection for AI-assisted work; the current terms are unclear.
Where the companies object
Their comments are positions presented to lawmakers, not settled policy.
- Challenges payments for links and snippets.
- Opposes compulsory licensing for AI training data.
- Calls for intermediary protections.
- Meta says link sharing is not article republication and payment rules could hurt publisher traffic and revenue.
- TikTok objects to disclosure when AI is used only as an assistant.
- Meta also calls for intermediary protections.
How the bill reached this stage
The proposal is being considered by lawmakers and the government.
What remains unsettled
The version discussed at the hearing was not available, and the proposal has changed since July.
- Which provisions remain in the current text
- How human involvement and AI disclosure would be defined
- How licensing, exceptions and any collective body would work
- Whether platforms would change services and how audiences or publishers would be affected
How the Draft Could Reshape News and AI
The dispute concerns how value and control are divided among publishers, creators and platforms. A payment requirement for links or previews could create a new source of compensation for news organisations. But Google warned lawmakers that a levy on links would 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. Whether platforms would change their services, and how any change would affect audiences and publishers, remains unknown.
The AI provisions could also affect the availability of Indonesian-language material for model training, licensing costs, and the ability of artists and writers to challenge imitation or seek attribution. Google says licensing all training data would be technically unworkable at the scale of the web and has proposed a text-and-data-mining exception with an opt-out, such as robots.txt. Those arguments reflect the company’s position; the draft’s final balance between permission, exceptions and creator control has not been established.
For newsrooms, the debate includes competing claims about the effects of platform rules. Dewan Pers deputy chair Totok Suryanto told lawmakers that platforms account for 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. The time period and calculation basis for those figures were not supplied there, and the figures should be read as the council’s claims, not independently verified measurements. Publishers’ dependence on platform referrals and their bargaining power are central to the proposed payment system.
Popular right now
Dyson Purifier Cool PC2 De-NOx
KitchenAid 3-Piece Pasta Roller and Cutter Set for Stand Mixers
Sony WH-1000XM6 Wireless Noise-Canceling Headphones, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From July Draft to November Hearing
The bill is not the first Indonesian policy to address platforms and journalism. Presidential Regulation No. 32 of 2024 already requires digital platforms to support quality journalism. Suryanto told lawmakers that the regulation had not worked as intended and that platform compliance was low, according to Aktual. The proposed copyright revision would place related obligations within a broader law covering creative works and intellectual property.
Reuters reported the draft’s AI provisions on July 17, citing a bill text that law ministry intellectual-property official Hermansyah Siregar said was authentic but not final. Siregar said generative AI had disrupted the copyright framework and described the draft as Indonesia’s first explicit recognition of AI in its copyright law. At the November hearing, Google referred to Articles 29 and 30 as requiring payment for indexing, aggregation, curation and news snippets, according to Suara. The current text could not be obtained, and reports may refer to different versions, so those article references are provisional.
The draft has been introduced as a parliamentary initiative and is being considered by lawmakers and the government; it has not been enacted. The available source material describes the Indonesian debate and company responses but does not establish a detailed comparison with EU or U.S. law. The key immediate issue is the text under discussion in Jakarta, not a settled international model.
“The development of generative AI has disrupted the copyright framework.”
— Hermansyah Siregar, a law ministry intellectual-property official, speaking to Reuters
Key Terms and Timeline Remain Open
The current draft text is unavailable, and the version has changed since the July document cited by Reuters. It is therefore unclear which specific provisions remain in the November text, how the proposed payment system would work, or whether the AI clauses retain the same language. Reports also cite different versions, making precise article references uncertain.
The draft material described here does not settle how much human involvement would qualify for copyright protection, how AI disclosures would be enforced, or how a creator could demonstrate that a model copied a distinctive style. It is also unclear what counts as fair use for training, which works would require licenses, and how an opt-out would operate if one were adopted. The companies’ objections and proposals are positions presented to lawmakers, not decisions by the government.
No vote date was announced in the source material. It is also not clear whether the final bill would include the proposed sanctions, including possible revocation of local business permits, reported for the July draft. The status and final design of any collective licensing body remain unsettled.
Lawmakers Must Reconcile Competing Proposals
Baleg and the government are continuing deliberations. The next substantive step is to clarify the text under consideration and determine how it responds to the objections raised by Google, Meta and TikTok, alongside arguments from the Press Council and other rights holders. No parliamentary vote date was available in the source material.
Readers should watch for a published or otherwise confirmed draft, further hearings, and any amendments to provisions on link payments, collective licensing, AI training, human authorship and disclosure. Until lawmakers approve a final text and it completes the required legislative process, the proposals remain under discussion rather than binding requirements.
Key Questions
Has Indonesia passed the AI copyright bill?
No. The revision is still under parliamentary deliberation by Baleg and the government. The source material gives no date for a vote.
What would the proposal require platforms to pay for?
Reuters’ account of the July draft said payments could cover aggregating, republishing or displaying news, including link previews, as well as using news content for AI training. The draft has changed, and the full text discussed in November was not available.
What are Google, Meta and TikTok objecting to?
Google opposed payments for links and snippets, a single collective licensing body and mandatory AI-training licenses. Meta said link-sharing is not republication and warned payment duties could hurt publisher traffic and revenue. TikTok said disclosure should not cover AI used only as assistance. These are the companies’ stated positions.
Would AI-generated work receive copyright protection?
Reuters reported that the July draft would protect AI-assisted works only if they met human-involvement criteria and would exclude fully AI-generated works. The draft did not define the required level of human input, and it is unclear whether those terms remain in the version now under discussion.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
