Thirty-one organisations for artists, songwriters and managers have signed an open letter asking record labels and music publishers to give creators a say before licensing their work to AI companies. The European Music Managers Alliance coordinated it, and signatories include the MMF, FAC and Ivors Academy in the UK, the Music Artists Coalition, Artist Rights Alliance and Black Music Action Coalition in the US, and manager groups in Australia, New Zealand and Canada.
The letter points to the deals rights holders have been signing with Suno, Udio, KLAY and Spotify and says the people whose songs, voices and likenesses give those deals their value are not being properly consulted. Some creators, it says, have simply been emailed that they will be included by default. The groups argue that moral, image and personality rights often sit with the artist, not the label.
EMMA sums up three demands. Creators should be able to refuse to have their music used in AI systems. The share of revenue going to the creator, the rights holder and the AI firm should be spelled out. And clear information should come before any deal is signed. EMMA's Jess Partridge warned the industry risks repeating the mistakes of streaming, and MMF chief Annabella Coldrick said the letter asks labels for the same consent the whole industry demands of AI firms.
The IFPI answered by pointing to the majors' lawsuits and lobbying against AI companies that take music without permission, and called for a united front. CMU notes that the reply addresses only the fight with AI firms, not the separate question of how labels share AI money with creators.
According to the report, the majors have promised consent for voice clones and for AI remixes of songs, but not for using catalogues as training data, and there is little public detail on how AI income will be divided. The creator groups argue that now, while these business models are still new, is the time to settle those terms.
Sources · 1