The changes, which take effect this week, require chart-eligible releases to be “substantially human made”. ARIA said the updated rules are designed to protect the role of human creativity and “promote the human nature of artistry” as AI-generated music becomes increasingly common.
The move follows growing concerns over the use of generative AI in the music industry, particularly after an AI-assisted cover of Madonna’s “Like A Prayer” created controversy in Australia.
ARIA Draws Line Between AI Assistance and AI-Created Music
Under the new regulations, artists will still be allowed to use artificial intelligence as part of the music-making process.
However, the core elements of a song must come from humans. ARIA requires the song to have been written by people, while lead vocals and primary instruments must also be performed by humans.
AI-assisted production techniques such as mastering, drum machines and Auto-Tune will remain permitted.
The distinction is intended to allow artists to benefit from emerging technology without allowing music that is effectively created wholesale by AI systems to compete against human-made recordings.
ARIA chief executive Annabelle Herd said the charts needed to adapt to technological developments while maintaining their connection to human artistry.
“These changes reflect our intent to remain dynamic and promote the human nature of artistry in what is, to say the least, a rapidly developing space,” Herd said.
“Artists already use AI tools in their work, the charts can and should evolve to keep room for that, but music generated wholesale by services built on artists' recordings is a different matter.”
She added: “A chart that rewards unlicensed AI output would undercut the very basis of the recorded music we exist to represent.”
AI Madonna Cover Sparks Debate
The new rules come after controversy surrounding an AI-assisted cover of Madonna's “Like A Prayer” by Australian DJ Josh Fawaz.
The track recently climbed to the top of the ARIA dance singles chart and reached No. 2 on Australia's overall singles chart. It also became a regular feature on commercial radio playlists and has reportedly accumulated more than 48 million streams on Spotify.
Following criticism surrounding the track, Fawaz subsequently added generative AI credits to the release.
The episode highlighted concerns about whether songs heavily dependent on artificial intelligence should be allowed to compete directly with recordings created primarily by human musicians.
ARIA said Australian artists are already competing for attention in “the most crowded market in history” and that the organisation was “not interested in promoting or celebrating the success of AI-generated music that does not contain human artistry”.
Artists Must Declare AI Use
Under the updated chart code, artists and their representatives will be required to disclose the use of AI when submitting music for chart consideration.
ARIA has also introduced measures that could affect songs after they have already entered the rankings.
If it is subsequently established that a recording was largely generated by AI, the organisation can retrospectively adjust its chart position. In cases where such a song reaches No. 1, ARIA may also request that awards issued for achieving the top position be returned.
Artists and their representatives will, however, have the opportunity to challenge decisions that exclude their music from the charts.
The rules also address another growing issue in the digital music industry by excluding releases that raise concerns about “stream or chart manipulation”.
Peking Duk Back New Rules
The changes have received support from some Australian musicians, including electronic duo Peking Duk.
Last month, the group posted an AI-assisted version of its 2014 hit “High” on Instagram, jokingly captioning it: “When you re-record your own song with AI so Australian radio will play it.”
Band member Adam Hyde later told Channel Nine's Today programme that AI-generated music was “removing the human experience from life”.
The comments reflect a wider debate within the music industry over how artificial intelligence should be incorporated into creative work without replacing the human contribution that gives music its identity.
Australia Joins Growing Global Push
Australia's decision follows similar moves in other music markets as chart organisations attempt to establish rules around AI-generated recordings.
Earlier this year, a song was removed from Sweden's music charts after it was determined to have been created using AI.
In July, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) also announced that AI-related guidelines would be introduced for official charts across Latin America, the Middle East, Africa and Southeast Asia.
The developments reflect growing pressure on the global music industry to establish clearer standards as generative AI tools become more sophisticated and accessible.
Albanese Promises Protection for Creatives
The debate has also reached the Australian government.
In July, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese pledged “the strongest possible protection” for Australian creatives against the potential misuse of artificial intelligence.
Albanese said writers and musicians should have the right to decide whether and how their work is used to train AI systems.
He argued that it would amount to “theft” if creative professionals lost control over the use of their work and were not properly compensated.
With ARIA's new rules now in effect, Australia is taking a clear position on the role of AI in its music charts: technology can assist human creativity, but recordings created largely without human artistry will not be allowed to compete for official chart recognition.