IMPF, the global organisation for independent music publishers, has put out a statement urging its members to “say with conviction” that they will not enter into any deals with AI companies that do not treat recording and song rights equally.
In a strongly worded social media post, the trade group says, “time and again when major music corporations have brokered deals with companies behind emerging and disruptive technology, allocation norms have been established without input from publishers, which ultimately means that songwriters get stuck with insufficient recognition and remuneration in perpetuity”.
With the majors now entering into licensing deals with AI companies like Udio and Suno, it adds, “this cannot be allowed to happen again. It is the underlying composition of a song that is so valuable to these new generative Al models, not the master recording and any licensing deals must be based on that fact”.
As both Universal Music and Warner Music have started announcing big AI licensing deals, creator groups around the world have started asking a number of questions about how those deals will work.
While it’s good that AI companies that previously claimed they didn’t need licences from the music industry are now entering into agreements with the majors, there is currently no transparency regarding how money paid by those companies will be shared out between stakeholders across the industry.
For songwriters, one key question is how AI income will be shared between the two distinct copyrights - the copyright in the song or composition, and the separate copyright in the master recording. With streaming, about 80% of the money paid into the music industry by the digital platforms flows to the recording rights, shared by labels and artists, leaving 20% for songwriters and music publishers.
Both Universal and Warner’s deals with Udio and Suno cover the two companies’ song catalogues as well as their recording catalogues (or at least those song catalogues that the majors can directly license, such as Anglo-American repertoire). But it’s not clear how they will split income between the rights.
Meanwhile, as indie publishers and songwriter collecting societies start to negotiate their own AI licensing deals, the fear is that the AI companies will have already committed the lion’s share of their licensing budgets to the major record labels.
Which is why IMPF is speaking out on this issue now, following a statement last week from the European Composer & Songwriter Alliance raising similar concerns. Both organisations believe that, with AI, at least 50% of the money paid into the music industry by each licensee should flow to the song.
In its social media post, published earlier today, IMPF says it “urges independent music publishers to say with conviction that they will not accept Al licensing agreements that do not allocate 50% of proceeds to songwriters and publishers”.