Fully AI-generated songs will no longer be eligible for Australia’s official music charts under new rules introduced by the Australian Recording Industry Association.
The change is due to take effect with this week’s ARIA Charts and is aimed at distinguishing music substantially created by people from recordings generated primarily by artificial intelligence.
ARIA said music could still use artificial intelligence as part of the creative process. However, tracks that are wholly or mostly generated by AI will not qualify for the charts.
The organisation has updated its Charts Code of Practice to reflect principles being adopted across the international recording industry.
Under the new rules, ARIA will have the ability to remove recordings that do not meet its eligibility requirements. It can also adjust chart positions and revoke awards where necessary.
Artists and their representatives will have an opportunity to challenge decisions.
The move follows growing controversy over the appearance of AI-generated music on Australian radio and streaming services.
One of the most prominent examples involved Queensland DJ and producer Josh Fawaz, whose AI-assisted version of Madonna’s “Like a Prayer” became the most-played song on Australian radio in July.
The recording also reached number four on two ARIA charts.
The song attracted criticism after listeners and music industry figures questioned how it had been produced. Fawaz later acknowledged using artificial intelligence, with Spotify’s listing indicating that AI-generated vocals and drums were involved.
The controversy highlighted a wider problem facing music organisations: technology has made it increasingly easy to create convincing recordings without traditional performers.
ARIA chief executive Annabelle Herd said artists were already using AI tools in their work, but there was an important distinction between using technology to assist a human creator and generating music almost entirely through artificial intelligence.
The new rules therefore do not amount to a complete ban on AI in music.
Musicians can continue using AI tools for tasks such as production, editing and other parts of the creative process, provided the final recording remains substantially human-made and does not raise concerns about chart or streaming manipulation.
The change is likely to become increasingly important as generative AI tools become more sophisticated.
For Australia’s music industry, the issue is not simply about technology. It also concerns how artists are credited, how music charts measure popularity and whether performers whose work is used to train AI systems are properly recognised.
The ARIA decision puts Australia among a growing number of music markets attempting to establish clearer rules around AI-generated recordings.
