Music AI faces licensing and compensation questions over unlicensed training data

Some companies developing AI music models are reportedly training them on large volumes of unlicensed music—“60 million tracks or something like that” was cited as an uncertain estimate. Whether this qualifies as fair use remains disputed: artists and labels reject that interpretation, while AI companies argue that training creates entirely new music and provides a tool for users.

One proposed compensation model would link musical influences or prompts used to create an AI song to payments for the relevant artists, labels and estates. Wilson Pickett was cited as an example of a deceased artist whose estate, in this view, should be compensated when his music is used for training.

The issue is expected to require regulation, court precedents and licensing deals. YouTube was cited as a precedent for eventually routing revenue from protected music to rights holders, although the process took time. Reduced access to licensed music could, in one forecast, make AI products less capable; the technology should continue, but on licensed and paid terms.