SoundCloud has issued a statement about a clause in its terms and conditions - which we now know was added in February 2024 - and which says, “In the absence of a separate agreement that states otherwise, you explicitly agree that your content may be used to inform, train, develop or serve as input to artificial intelligence or machine intelligence technologies or services as part of and for providing the services”.
This term provoked a flurry of debate online last week after it was spotted by Ed Newton-Rex, founder of the Fairly Trained initiative, and a vocal campaigner on music and AI.
Once that term was in the spotlight, concerns were raised that SoundCloud was using music uploaded to its platform by independent creators to train music-making generative AI. And without those creators really being aware that they'd consented to such a thing, by accepting terms they almost certainly didn't read.
None of which would really gel with SoundCloud positioning itself as an artist-friendly platform focused on empowering creators.
In its statement, SoundCloud insisted that it is not using - and has never used - content uploaded by its users to train a generative AI model, adding that the controversial term was added in early 2024 to allow users to utilise other AI-powered tools on its platform.
“SoundCloud has never used artist content to train AI models”, the company said, adding, “nor do we develop AI tools or allow third parties to scrape or use SoundCloud content from our platform for AI training purposes. In fact, we implemented technical safeguards, including a ‘no AI’ tag on our site, to explicitly prohibit unauthorised use”.
The AI term, it went on, “was intended to clarify how content may interact with AI technologies within SoundCloud’s own platform”. That includes, “personalised recommendations, content organisation, fraud detection, and improvements to content identification with the help of AI technologies”.
“Any future application of AI at SoundCloud will be designed to support human artists, enhancing the tools, capabilities, reach and opportunities available to them on our platform”, it added.
Acknowledging the concerns raised by SoundCloud users last week, it concluded, “artists will continue to have control over their work, and we’ll keep our community informed every step of the way as we explore innovation and apply AI technologies responsibly, especially as legal and commercial frameworks continue to evolve”.
Although critics have welcomed the clarification from SoundCloud, some reckon it could go further. Newton-Rex wrote on social media, “Good news that they haven’t used people’s music to train AI models, but it’s worrying that they haven’t said they won’t in future”.
He added that SoundCloud’s statement is “carefully worded, and notably doesn’t rule out training generative AI models on artists’ work in future - something that their existing terms would permit them to do”.
Addressing SoundCloud directly, he concluded, “please rule out training generative models on users' music in future, and update your terms to reflect this!”
