Various music industry bodies from around the world have penned an open letter that calls for artists and songwriters to offer consent before going into any AI deals.
Titled Artists And Songwriters Must Not Be Pressured Into AI Deals Without
Meaningful Consent, the open letter was published today (June 22) and outlines that it has become increasingly common for record companies and publishers to negotiate AI deals without consulting artists and songwriters “whose works, voices, performances, likenesses and creative identities” have shaped the music involved.
The letter is signed by huge industry bodies including The Ivors Academy, the European Music Managers Alliance, the European Composer and Songwriter Alliance (ECSA), the Music Artists Coalition and more, and highlights that while “artists and songwriters remain the primary holders of many of the rights at stake”, they are often being roped into deals “without clear authority, consent and accountability”.
When it comes to AI deals, the signees say that artists are being told that they will be “opted in to AI-related uses by default, with little actual choice offered”, and urged to give permission “without sufficient information, clear terms or guaranteed remuneration”.
The letter adds that while they acknowledge the opportunities that can be made with AI, they object to artists being used as “catalogue assets” and do not want this push for innovation to “override” the rights of the songwriters.
As well as objecting to the current structure, the letter also outlines three core changes they want to see implemented to see progress.
These include artists and songwriters “actively and specifically consent[ing] before their works, voice, performance, likeness or creative identity is used in connection with AI”, and retaining “control over how it will be used”. It also pushes for more clarity with how deals are worded, so artists know exactly what the plan will entail, and can say no “without fear of penalisation”.
The second core deal is for fair compensation, meaning that if an artist does choose to participate in AI-related uses, they share in the profits and value made, without being seen simply as a “general label asset”.
Finally, the letter pushes for more clarity and transparency, meaning that they are given “clear, timely and understandable information about any AI-related deal or proposal
affecting their rights” ahead of being expected to make a decision in order to make informed decisions.
Aside from the three main changes, the signees also push for no default opt-ins, no forced AI clauses, and ‘no use of artists’ work, voice, performance, likeness or creative identity
without meaningful consent, fair remuneration and full transparency.
“At a time when policymakers are reviewing copyright rules in response to AI, the protection of artists’ and songwriters’ rights, voices and remuneration is not negotiable,” it concluded. “The structures being created now will shape the music ecosystem for years to come. The future of music must be built with artists, songwriters and their representatives, not imposed on them.”
After the letter was made public, a spokesperson for the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) shared that while there have been various different pushes to protect protect artists’ and songwriters’ rights in the age of AI, “they share the same fundamental objectives: combating the unauthorised use of music and establishing licensing models that return revenue to artists and songwriters”.
“At a time when some tech companies large and small are engaging in the wholesale theft of virtually every song ever recorded, our members have sued infringers, pushed for legislation, and developed new licensing models, all to protect the interests of artists, songwriters and rightsholders and ensure they are compensated,” they added.
CEO of The Ivors Academy, Roberto Neri, also voiced his support for the proposed changes, saying that “songwriters must not be expected to sign away their rights without proper authorisation, fair remuneration, and full transparency.”
The push for change comes as the use of AI in music has become increasingly concerning and increasingly prominent in recent years, and a study conducted last year revealed that 97 per cent of people “can’t tell the difference” between real and AI music.
Before then, Deezer revealed that 28 per cent of music uploaded to the streaming platform was fully AI-generated, and a warning also emerged that people working in music are likely to lose a quarter of their income to Artificial Intelligence over the next four years.
In September, Spotify confirmed that it was cracking down on AI by removing 75million “spammy tracks” and targeting impersonators, and around that same time research found that AI-generated songs were being uploaded to dead musicians’ Spotify profiles without permission.
Earlier this spring, the government announced it will ditch “deeply damaging” plans to allow AI firms to use copyrighted works without permission – and names including Paul McCartney, Kate Bush, Dua Lipa and Elton John led a campaign urging the government to protect artists’ work from being ripped off.
The latter came after the government previously put forward controversial plans to change copyright rules to let AI firms “steal” copyrighted works without paying or seeking consent from music creators, writers and artists.
