🔍 Read the full analysis: How The Indonesia AI Copyright Debate Could Affect Online Platforms on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get the little things that make your day delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
TL;DR
Indonesia’s parliamentary copyright bill is under discussion, and Google, Meta and TikTok raised objections at a hearing on November 11, 2026. The draft could require payments for some uses of news and set rules for AI training and disclosure, but the current text is not publicly confirmed and no vote date has been announced.
Google, Meta and TikTok challenged parts of Indonesia’s proposed copyright-law revision at a parliamentary hearing in Jakarta on November 11, 2026, as lawmakers consider rules that could require payments for displaying news and establish conditions for AI training on copyrighted material. The bill is still under deliberation, and the exact provisions in the latest draft remain unclear.
The hearing was held by the parliament’s Legislation Body, known as Baleg, which is discussing the revision with the government. According to Kompas, lawmakers heard from the three platforms, the Press Council and Satu Lisensi Indonesia. Google had objected earlier; Meta and TikTok joined the pushback at this session.
The bill would revise Law No. 28 of 2014. A July draft reported by Reuters proposed payments when platforms aggregate, republish or show link previews of news, with money distributed to publishers through state-supervised collective management organizations. It also proposed payments for use of news in AI training. The draft described in July is not final, and the full text under discussion in November was not available for review.
The companies raised different concerns. Google argued that charging for links and snippets could limit news access and said mandatory licensing for all AI training data would be impractical. It also called for safe-harbor protections for platforms and an opt-out mechanism for text and data mining. Meta said sharing a link is not the same as republishing content and argued that payment duties could reduce traffic and revenue for publishers. TikTok objected to disclosure requirements applying when AI is only used as an assistive tool, and also sought safe-harbor protection.
How the AI copyright debate could affect online platforms
Lawmakers are considering new rules for news payments and AI use. The bill remains under discussion, and its latest text is unclear.
What the reported draft could change
A July draft described proposals; the version under discussion in November was not publicly confirmed.
Payments for news use
Some aggregation, republication or link previews could trigger payments to publishers.
Licensing or fair use
The reported draft addressed copyrighted material used to train AI.
Rules for AI work
Proposals covered AI disclosure, style imitation and protection for some AI-assisted work.
Why platforms objected
Google, Meta and TikTok raised different concerns at the parliamentary hearing.
- Google warned link fees could limit news access.
- Meta said sharing a link is not republication and fees could reduce publisher traffic and revenue.
- Google called blanket licensing for AI training impractical.
- TikTok objected to disclosure duties when AI is only an assistive tool.
- Both sought safe-harbor protections.
Possible effects on readers and businesses
If link payments remain in the bill, platforms may reconsider how Indonesian news appears in their products.
Platforms could negotiate licenses for covered news uses.
Products could alter link previews or other ways news is shown.
Developers and creators could face rules on training material and disclosure.
What remains unsettled
The bill is still being deliberated by Baleg and the government.
- The latest draft text has not been publicly confirmed.
- No parliamentary vote date has been announced.
- Licensing, exceptions, enforcement and treatment of AI-assisted work remain open questions.
How Link Fees Could Change News Access
If the bill retains a payment requirement for news links or previews, platforms could face a choice between negotiating licenses, changing how Indonesian news appears in their products, or withdrawing some services. Google’s representative said at the hearing that a levy on links would leave the company with “no choice” but to stop crawling, indexing and distributing Indonesian news, according to Reuters. That is the company’s stated position, not a confirmed outcome.
The dispute also concerns who receives value from online news. The Press Council 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, according to the source material. Those figures were presented by the council; the basis and time period were not specified in the available account. If adopted, a collective-payment system could redirect revenue to publishers, but the distribution rules and effects on referral traffic are not settled.
For AI developers and creators, provisions on training data, style imitation and disclosure could shape what material can be used and how AI-generated or AI-assisted work is labeled. The rules could affect local services and international platforms operating in Indonesia. Their practical effect depends on the final wording, enforcement arrangements and any exceptions for research or other uses.
Products Worth Considering
Levoit Core 400S-P Smart Air Purifier for Large Rooms
Coway Airmega Mighty2 Air Purifier, AP-1512N
Therabody Theragun Relief Massage Gun, 3-Speed, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From 2014 Law to AI Rules
The proposal is a parliamentary initiative that was approved as such in a plenary session on March 12, 2026, and is now being considered by Baleg with the government. It would update Indonesia’s 2014 copyright law to address generative AI as well as the relationship between digital platforms and news publishers.
Reuters reported on a July version that would recognize AI in copyright law, bar AI from imitating a creator’s “distinctive style,” require disclosure of AI use, and protect AI-assisted work only when it met a human-involvement test. Fully AI-generated work would not qualify for that protection under the reported draft. It also placed copyrighted material used for AI training under fair-use provisions or licensing agreements. The draft did not define how much human involvement would be required.
Indonesia already has Presidential Regulation No. 32 of 2024, which requires digital platforms to support quality journalism. At the November hearing, Press Council deputy chair Totok Suryanto said the regulation had not worked as intended and that platform compliance was low, according to Aktual. The proposed copyright revision would add a separate legal framework; it is not yet law.
“A levy on links would leave Google with “no choice” but to stop crawling, indexing and distributing Indonesian news.”
— Google representative Agung Pamungkas, as reported by Reuters
The full text being discussed in November was not available in the source material, and accounts cited different draft versions. Google referred to Articles 29 and 30 at the hearing, but those article numbers should not be treated as definitive without the current text. The July provisions are a reported earlier draft, not confirmed final language.
Key implementation questions are also open: how a human contribution would qualify an AI-assisted work for protection; how style imitation would be defined; what uses of copyrighted material would count as fair use; how collective licensing bodies would operate; and whether platforms would have a workable notice-and-action process. The draft’s possible sanctions, including business-permit revocation described in the July account, have not been confirmed in the latest text available here.
There is no announced date for a parliamentary vote. The platforms’ warnings and the Press Council’s figures are statements made by interested parties, not established predictions of what the law would do.
Lawmakers Continue Bill Deliberations
Baleg is continuing deliberations with the government. The next useful public milestone will be release or confirmation of the version being reviewed, followed by any revisions, hearings or scheduled vote. Until that text is available, publishers, creators and platforms cannot reliably determine which proposed duties will remain.
If the bill advances, attention will turn to how lawmakers balance publisher compensation with access to news, and how they define licensing, exceptions and platform liability. Any eventual rules would also need practical guidance for AI developers and creators, including disclosure standards and treatment of AI-assisted work. No final outcome or implementation timetable has been announced.
Key Questions
Has Indonesia passed the copyright bill?
No. The revision is still being deliberated by parliament’s Legislation Body with the government. No vote date was announced in the available source material.
What could the bill require online platforms to pay for?
A July draft reported by Reuters proposed payments for aggregating, republishing or displaying news link previews, and for using news in AI training. The latest draft text was not available, so it is unclear whether those provisions remain unchanged.
What AI rules appeared in the reported draft?
The July version described by Reuters addressed style imitation, disclosure of AI use, protection for some AI-assisted work and licensing or fair-use treatment of copyrighted training material. These were draft proposals, not enacted rules.
Why are Google, Meta and TikTok objecting?
Google warned that link fees could affect news access and opposed blanket licensing for AI training. Meta argued that links are not republication and that fees could harm publisher traffic. TikTok said disclosure should not apply when AI only assists and called for platform safe-harbor protections.
What remains unknown about the proposal?
The current bill wording, final payment and licensing arrangements, definitions for AI-assisted work, enforcement details and voting timetable remain unclear. The full text discussed at the November hearing was not available in the source material.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
