OpenAI and Anthropic say they would welcome Australian AI data breach reporting laws

OpenAI and Anthropic say they would welcome Australian AI data breach reporting laws
OpenAI and Anthropic logos are seen in this illustration taken 11 June 2026.
Reuters

OpenAI and Anthropic told Australian parliament on Tuesday they would welcome laws requiring them to report data breaches carried out by their AI agents, acknowledging the decision to notify authorities was currently at their discretion.

The comments come amid growing scrutiny of artificial intelligence (AI) regulation in Australia, where policymakers are considering new rules governing AI safety, transparency and copyright protections.

Representatives from both companies appeared before a parliamentary hearing examining the impact and regulation of generative AI technologies. They said incident-reporting requirements could provide greater accountability and public confidence in the rapidly evolving sector.

At present, no Australian law specifically requires AI developers to report dangerous behaviour or security incidents involving their AI systems.

In the United States, lawmakers have proposed federal measures that would require developers of advanced AI models to report certain high-risk incidents, including attempts by AI systems to evade human oversight. However, a broad reporting framework covering all significant AI-related incidents has yet to be established.

Support mandatory disclosures but against relaxing AI copyright laws

Both OpenAI and Claude maker Anthropic are awaiting clearance for large data centres planned by developers in Australia where they have agreed to be the main buyer of computing power.

“We would support a framework on mandatory disclosures,” OpenAI's Chief Strategy Officer Jason Kwon said at the hearing.

But Australian content creators pushed back against attempts by AI companies to relax copyright laws which currently require the mostly foreign-domiciled tech companies to negotiate licensing deals before using their material for model training.

Media reports have said the Australian government was considering an “opt out” clause for AI companies, effectively giving the AI companies access to content unless a rights holder objects.

But that “places the burden on rights holders”, said Kate Gilchrist, head of content and legal operations for national broadcaster the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC).

“We cannot scour the internet and ensure that we are opting out on all those sites”, she said. “The copyright system is completely adequate to manage the business of AI.”

As OpenAI learned about the breach of the Australian health website and three other government websites, “we were trying to work through a process, we were trying to come up with a standard to apply”, Kwon told the inquiry.

“That is a function that a legal measure can provide. The representatives of society need to make more decisions so we are not making all these decisions.”

Current Australian copyright laws generally require technology companies to obtain permission or negotiate licensing agreements before using copyrighted content to train AI models. Many rights holders have argued that these protections should remain in place as AI companies seek access to large volumes of training data.

The parliamentary hearings are scheduled to continue until 9 October, with the committee expected to deliver its final report by 30 November.

The findings could help shape the next phase of Australia's approach to AI regulation, including potential requirements for incident reporting, transparency standards and copyright protections.

Read more: 

Tags