artificial intelligence
Page: 6
Around the time that ChatGPT was first released to the public, Alex Bestall, CEO of Rightsify, a music production library, discovered that he was sitting on a new, lucrative business opportunity. “I realized all the songs and all the metadata we have around the songs had a lot of value for AI,” he says. “It was a pretty quick and easy choice for us to license our library out.”
Hundreds of thousands — if not millions — of songs or other musical content are needed to train a competitive AI model to generate music. Though a number of AI companies believe they don’t need to pay for the music that their models train on, citing “fair use,” others have taken a more musician-friendly approach by paying artists and rights holders when using their music to train AI models.
On the surface, the AI industry seems like a perfect new customer for music production libraries — affordable, pre-cleared catalogs of songs in a variety of styles. Historically, production music has been popular among advertisers, social media creators, podcasters and low-budget film and TV producers who need music to soundtrack their creations but lack the time or money to license big-name hits, which often have multiple rights holders and hefty fees. As use cases for production music have grown, so has that sector of the publishing business. As of 2022, MIDiA Research says production music is worth about $1 billion across recorded music and publishing combined.
Trending on Billboard
While many artists’ rights advocates consider licensing songs to be the “ethical” way to train an AI music model, it still poses a legitimate threat to the existing music business: “Once the [licensing transaction] is made, that model is going to end up totally competing with you for the same customers,” says Antony Demekin, CEO of Tuney, an AI music company that makes songs intended for social media creators and podcasters. “Over time this could degrade your whole business if you’re not careful about the deal you make.”
No standard contract exists for the licensing of production music for AI training. Despite the long-term risks, Bestall says he has licensed his back catalog to multiple AI companies. (Non-disclosure agreements prevent him from revealing which ones.) “Usually we license our back catalog and then we have an ongoing commitment to deliver a certain amount of music over the next two or three years of the agreement,” he says.
In the short term, these new deals between music production libraries and AI companies have actually created jobs for more human musicians. Given his new customers’ desire for more music during their deal terms, Bestall now has 24 full-time musicians — and almost 100 contractors — employed to make more music and grow Rightsify’s library, which already has over 1 million copyrights.
Lee Johnson, CEO and founder of production library Audiosparx, says AI has also allowed him to grow his business. Audiosparx is best known for licensing its catalog to train Stability AI’s Stable Audio model beginning in 2023, and Johnson says he received permission from the musicians represented in his catalog before he agreed to license their music to the AI company. Audiosparx acts as the licensor for production musicians, but unlike Bestall’s library, it does not acquire the songs in its catalog outright. “We took the deal to our artist community and about 90% of the artists opted into it,” he says. “About 10% decided to stay out of it. It was encouraging to see that much uptake because a lot of people are very passionately against [AI]. … We just felt it made more sense to have a seat on the train and ride the train to the future, rather than getting run over by [it].”
Bestall and Johnson say that, so far, partnering with AI companies has not yet affected their other business. Bestall, however, remains sober about the changes that may occur in the next few years. “I know it’s a threat to our existing business lines, but a huge opportunity for the future,” he says. “I think if people are too married to the exact business model of the past, they may struggle.” Johnson, who has pivoted Audiosparx’s business multiple times over its 20-year existence, expresses a similar view about being open to change.
Not everyone agrees. “I think this is short-term money for a long-term loss,” says Henry Phipps, an emerging film composer who previously held a full-time job writing songs for a production library. After surveying the future of AI music, he left his post to try working for an AI music start-up. Now, he’s back writing for libraries and working toward his dream of being a film/TV composer. (Phipps spoke to Billboard under the condition that his former employers’ names would be kept private.) “But you can’t blame anyone for taking the opportunity to include their music in these datasets because you’d be missing out on a short-term paycheck, and everyone else would go ahead,” he says. “It’s kind of futile to try to stop the tide. Someone will always take the deal.”
To Phipps, the way production music is made is already similar to the way AI music is prompted. “I get a brief, which feels like a prompt,” he says. “Recently, one of those prompts was for reality TV with a bunch of adjectives, and then my job is to return a piece of music. It already feels like machine work in a way.”
While “very few people aspire to be production library composers long-term,” Phipps explains, “it is a way into [the music business] — to survive, eat and pay rent and work towards projects that are more creatively fulfilling.” Phipps says working at an AI music start-up made him “more nervous” for his future opportunities as a composer for film and TV. As he sees it, AI music could augment, but not entirely replace, the compositions of blockbuster film scorers — but it might “cut off the bottom rungs of the ladder” by decreasing opportunities for young upstarts like him.
Ed Newton-Rex, former vp of audio for Stability AI and founder of non-profit Fairly Trained, which certifies AI music companies that properly license their training data, advises that “if a library wants to take a deal like this, the terms should be very well thought through.”
Particular areas of concern Newton-Rex identifies include making sure that once a deal term ends, the AI model that used it will be retired or re-trained without the library’s material. “There’s no current way to just untrain a model, but you can add clauses to control what happens after the license is over,” he says. Newton-Rex also advises libraries to be careful about licensing their data to an “open-source model” — a move he calls “totally irreversible” because it makes the model available for public use.
Still, Newton-Rex admits there is “absolutely” still risk ahead. “Musicians making production music are hugely at risk,” he says. “Ultimately, generative AI is faster, cheaper and the quality is already very good.”
Just in case, Bestall is covering his bases by launching his own AI model, Hydra II, to generate royalty-free background music for cafes, hotel lobbies and other public spaces, should his customers ever prefer AI music to his current repertoire of background library music. Still, he feels his library will always be essential: “We’re not too concerned about the possibility of AI companies saying they don’t need production music anymore. Human data is so valuable for AI.”
Apple has jumped into the race to bring generative artificial intelligence to the masses, spotlighting a slew of features Monday designed to soup up the iPhone, iPad and Mac.
And in a move befitting a company known for its marketing prowess, the AI technology coming as part of free software updates later this year is being billed as “Apple Intelligence.”
Even as it tried to put its own stamp on technology’s hottest area, Apple tacitly acknowledged during its World Wide Developers Conference that it needs help catching up with companies like Microsoft and Google, which have emerged as the early leaders in AI. Apple is leaning on ChatGPT, made by the San Francisco startup OpenAI, to make its often-bumbling virtual assistant Siri smarter and more helpful.
“All of this goes beyond artificial intelligence, it’s personal intelligence, and it is the next big step for Apple,” CEO Tim Cook said.
Trending on Billboard
Siri’s optional gateway to ChatGPT will be free to all iPhone users and made available on other Apple products once the option is baked into the next generation of Apple’s operating systems. ChatGPT subscribers are supposed to be able to easily sync their existing accounts when using the iPhone, and should get more advanced features than free users would.
To herald the alliance with Apple, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman sat in the front row of the packed conference, which was attended by developers from more than 60 countries.
“Together with Apple, we’re making it easier for people to benefit from what AI can offer,” Altman said in a statement.
Beyond allowing Siri to tap into ChatGPT’s storehouse of knowledge, Apple is giving its 13-year-old virtual assistant an extensive makeover designed to make it more personable and versatile, even as it currently fields about 1.5 billion queries a day.
When Apple releases free updates to the software powering the iPhone and its other products this fall, Siri will signal its presence with flashing lights along the edges of the display screen. It will be able to handle hundreds of more tasks — including chores that may require tapping into third-party devices — than it can now, based on Monday’s presentations.
Apple’s full suite of upcoming features will only work on more recent models of the iPhone, iPad and Mac because the devices require advanced processors. For instance, consumers will need last year’s iPhone 15 Pro or buy the next model coming out later this year to take full advantage of Apple’s AI package, although all the tools will work on Macs dating back to 2020 after that computer’s next operating system is installed.
The AI-packed updates coming to the next versions of Apple software are meant to enable the billions of people who use the company’s devices to get more done in less time, while also giving them access to creative tools that could liven things up. For instance, Apple will deploy AI to allow people to create emojis, dubbed “Genmojis” on the fly to fit the vibe they are trying to convey.
Apple’s goal with AI “is not to replace users, but empower them,” Craig Federighi, Apple’s senior vice president of software engineering, told reporters. Users will also have the option of going into the device settings to turn off any AI tools they don’t want.
Monday’s showcase seemed aimed at allaying concerns Apple might be losing its edge with the advent of AI, a technology expected to be as revolutionary as the 2007 introduction of the Phone. Both Google and Samsung have already released smartphone models touting AI features as their main attractions, while Apple has been stuck in an uncharacteristically extended sales slump.
AI mania is the main reason that Nvidia, the dominant maker of the chips underlying the technology, has seen its market value rocket from about $300 billion at the end of 2022 to about $3 trillion. The meteoric rise allowed Nvidia to surpass Apple as the second most valuable company in the U.S. Earlier this year, Microsoft also eclipsed the iPhone maker on the strength of its so-far successful push into AI.
Investors didn’t seem as impressed with Apple’s AI presentation as the crowd that came to the company’s Cupertino, California, headquarters to see it. Apple’s stock price dipped nearly 2% Monday.
Despite that negative reaction, Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives asserted in a research note that Apple is “taking the right path.” He hailed the presentation as a “historical” day for a company that already has reshaped the tech industry and society.
Besides pulling AI tricks out of its bag, Apple also used the conference to confirm that it will be rolling out a technology called Rich Communications Service, or RCS, to its iMessage app. The technology should improve the quality and security of texting between iPhones and devices powered by Android software, such as the Samsung Galaxy and Google Pixel.
The change, due out with the next version of iPhone’s operating software, won’t eliminate the blue bubbles denoting texts originating from iPhones and the green bubbles marking text sent from Android devices — a distinction that has become a source of social stigma.
In another upcoming twist to the iPhone’s messaging app, users will be able to write a text (or have an AI tool compose it) in advance and schedule a specific time to automatically send it.
Monday’s presentation marked the second straight year that Apple has created a stir at its developers conference by using it to usher in a trendy form of technology that other companies already had employed.
Last year, Apple provided an early look at its mixed-reality headset, the Vision Pro, which wasn’t released until early 2024. Nevertheless, Apple’s push into mixed reality — with a twist that it bills as “spatial computing” — has raised hopes that there will be more consumer interest in this niche technology.
Part of that optimism stems from Apple’s history of releasing technology later than others, then using sleek designs and slick marketing campaigns to overcome its tardy start.
Bringing more AI to the iPhone will likely raise privacy concerns — a topic that Apple has gone to great lengths to assure its loyal customers it can be trusted not to peer too deeply into their personal lives. Apple did talk extensively Monday about its efforts to build strong privacy protections and controls around its AI technology.
One way Apple is trying to convince consumers that the iPhone won’t be used to spy on them is harnessing its chip technology so most of its AI-powered features are handled on the device itself instead of at remote data centers, often called “the cloud.” Going down this route would also help protect Apple’s profit margins because AI processing through the cloud is far more expensive than when it is run solely on a device.
When Apple users make AI demands that requiring computing power beyond what’s available on the device, the tasks will be handled by what the company is calling a “private cloud” that is supposed to shield their personal data.
Apple’s AI “will be aware of your personal data without collecting your personal data,” Federighi said.
When Snowd4y, a Toronto parody rapper, released the track “Wah Gwan Delilah” featuring Drake via Soundcloud on Monday (June 3), it instantly went viral.
“This has to be AI,” one commenter wrote about the song. It was a sentiment shared by many others, particularly given the track’s ridiculous lyrics and the off-kilter audio quality of Drake’s vocals.
To date, the two rappers have not confirmed or denied the AI rumor. Though Drake posted the track on his Instagram story, it is hardly a confirmation that the vocals in question are AI-free. (As we learned during Drake’s recent beef with Kendrick Lamar, the rapper is not afraid of deep-faking voices).
Trending on Billboard
To try to get to the bottom of the “Wah Gwan Delilah” mystery, Billboard contacted two companies that specialize in AI audio detection to review the track. The answer, unfortunately, was not too satisfying.
“Our first analysis reveals SOME traces of [generative] AI, but there seems to be a lot of mix involved,” wrote Romain Simiand, chief product officer of Ircam Amplify, a French company that creates audio tools for rights holders, in an email response.
Larry Mills, senior vp of sales at Pex, which specializes in tracking and monetizing music usage across the web, also found mixed results. He told Billboard the Pex research and development team “ran the song through [their] VoiceID matcher” and that “Drake’s voice on the ‘Wah Gwan Delilah’ verse does not match as closely to Drake’s voice…[as his voice on] official releases [does], but it is close enough to confirm it could be Drake’s own voice or a good AI copy.” Notably, Pex’s VoiceID tool alone is not enough to definitively distinguish between real and AI voices, but its detection of differences between the singer/rapper’s voice on “Wah Gwan Delilah” and his other, officially released songs could indicate some level of AI manipulation.
A representative for Drake did not immediately respond to Billboard’s request for comment.
How to Screen for AI in Songs
There are multiple types of tools that are currently used to distinguish between AI-generated music and human-made music, but these nascent products are still developing and not definitive. As Pex’s Jakub Galka recently wrote in a company blog post about the topic, “Identifying AI-generated music [is] a particularly difficult task.”
Some detectors, like Ircam’s, identify AI music using “artifact detection,” meaning they detect parts of a work that are off-base from reality. A clear example of this is seen with AI-generated images. Early AI images often contained hands with extra or misshapen fingers, and some detection tools exist to pick up on these inaccuracies.
Other detectors rely on reading watermarks embedded in the AI-generated music. While these watermarks are not perceptible to the human ear, they can be detected by certain tools. Galka writes that “since watermarking is intended to be discoverable by watermark detection algorithms, such algorithms can also be used to show how to remove or modify the watermark embedded in audio so it is no longer discoverable” — something he sees as a major flaw with this system of detection.
Pex’s method of using VoiceID, which can determine if a singer matches between multiple recordings, can also be useful in AI detection, though it is not a clear-cut answer. This technology is particularly helpful when users take to the internet and release random tracks with Drake vocals, whether they’re leaked songs or AI deepfakes. With VoiceID, Pex can tell a rights holder that their voice was detected on another track that might not be an official release from them.
When VoiceID is paired with the company’s other product, Automatic Content Recognition (ACR), it can sometimes determine if a song uses AI vocals or not, but the company says there is not enough information on “Wah Gwan Delilah” to complete a full ACR check.
Parody’s Role in AI Music
Though it can’t be determined without a doubt whether “Wah Gwan Delilah” contains AI vocals, parody songs in general have played a major role in popularizing and normalizing AI music. This is especially evident on TikTok, which is replete with so-called “AI Covers,” pairing famous vocalists with unlikely songs. Popular examples of this trend include Kanye West singing “Pocket Full of Sunshine” by Natasha Bedingfield, Juice WRLD singing “Viva La Vida” by Coldplay, Michael Jackson singing “Careless Whisper” by George Michael and more.
Most recently, AI comedy music took center stage with Metro Boomin‘s SoundCloud-released track “BBL Drizzy” — which sampled an AI-generated song of the same name. The track poked fun at Drake and his supposed “Brazilian Butt Lift” during the rapper’s beef with Lamar, and in the process, it became the first major use of an AI-generated sample. Later, Drake and Sexyy Red sampled the original AI-generated “BBL Drizzy” on their own song, “U My Everything,” lifting “BBL Drizzy” to new heights.
Writing and playing a song once required some level of musical training, and recording was a technically complex process involving expensive equipment. Today, thanks to advances in artificial intelligence, a growing number of companies allow anyone in the world to skip this process and create a new song with a click of a button.
This is an exciting prospect in Silicon Valley. “It’s really easy to get investment in that sort of thing right now,” Lifescore co-founder and CTO Tom Gruber says dryly, “because everyone thinks that genAI is going to change the whole world and there will be no human creators left.” (Lifescore offers “AI-powered music generation in service of artists and rights holders.”)
Recently, however, some executives in the AI music space have been asking: How much do average users actually want to generate their own songs?
Trending on Billboard
“For whatever reason, you’re just not seeing an extreme level of adoption of these products yet among the everyday consumer,” notes one founder of an AI music company who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “Where’s the 80 to 100 million users on this stuff?”
“My hunch is no text-to-music platform will have decent retention figures yet,” says Ed Newton-Rex, who founded the AI music generation company Jukedeck and then worked at Stability AI. “It’s a moment of magic when you first try a generative music platform that works well. Then most people don’t really have a use for it.” So far, the most popular use for song generation tools appears to be making meme songs.
While there are hundreds of companies working on genAI music technology, the two that have generated the most headlines this year are Suno and Udio. The former recently announced that 10 million users have tested it in eight months, while the latter told Bloomberg that 600,000 people tried its song generation product in the first two weeks. Neither company said how many of those testers became regular users. Compare this with ChatGPT, which was estimated to gain 100 million weekly users within two months. (Though there’s chatter that growth is leveling off there, too.)
It’s early for many of these AI song generation companies, of course. That said, executives who work at the intersection of music and artificial intelligence keep wondering: How can tools that spit out new tracks on command help users?
“You can end up with a really cool tech that doesn’t really solve a real problem,” Gruber notes. “If I want something that sounds like a folk song and has a clever lyric, I’ve already got all I can eat on Spotify, right? There’s no scarcity there.”
Part of the reason for ChatGPT’s explosion, according to Antony Demekhin, co-founder of Tuney, is that it “clearly solves a bunch of problems — it can edit text for you, help you code.” (Tuney develops “ethical music AI for creative media.”) Even so, a recent multi-country survey from the Reuters Institute noted that for ChatGPT, “frequent use is rare… Many of those who say they have used generative AI have only used it once or twice.”
Within the subset of survey respondents who said they have used generative AI for “creating media,” “making audio” was the ninth most popular task, with 3% of people engaging in it. The Reuters Institute’s survey indicates that generative AI tools are more commonly used for email writing, creative writing, and coding.
“How many ‘non-musicians’ actually wanted to create music before?” asks Michael “MJ” Jacob, founder of Lemonaide, a company developing “creative AI for musicians” (around 10,000 users). “I don’t think it’s true to say ‘everyone,’ as tempting as it may be.”
Another factor that could be holding back AI audio creation, according to Diaa El All, founder and CEO of Soundful, is the number of competing companies and the difficulty of judging the quality of their output. (Soundful, which bills itself as “the leading AI Music Studio for creators,” has a user-count “in the seven figures,” El All says.) Mike Caren, founder of the label and publishing company Artist Partner Group, believes that many people will try an AI song generator “that’s not that good, have a bad experience, and not come back for six months or a year.”
The uncertain regulatory climate almost certainly inhibits the spread of AI song-making tools as well. For now, in the U.S., there are open questions about the copyrightability of AI generated tracks, potentially limiting their commercial value.
In addition, these programs need to be trained on large musical data-sets to generate credible tracks. While many prominent tech companies believe they should be allowed to undertake this process at will, labels and publishers argue that they need licensing agreements.
In other sectors, AI companies have already been sued for training on news articles and images without permission. Until the rules around training are clarified, through court cases or regulation, “corporate brands don’t want any of the risk” that comes with opening themselves up to potential litigation, explains Chris Walch, CEO and co-founder of Lifescore.
AI music leaders also believe their song generation technologies still suffer from a bad reputation. “I think the tech-lash and the stigma is really unexpected and very powerful,” the company founder says.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently discussed this on the The All-in Podcast: “Let’s say we paid 10,000 musicians to create a bunch of music just to make a great training set where the music model could learn everything about song structure and what makes a good catchy beat,” he said. “I was kind of posing that as a thought experiment to musicians, and they’re like, ‘Well, I can’t object to that on any principled basis at that point. And yet, there’s still something I don’t like about it.’” (So far, OpenAI has steered clear of the music industry.)
While the average civilian’s interest in AI song generation remains unproven, plenty of producers and aspiring artists, who are already making music on a daily basis, would like to test products that spark ideas or streamline their workflow. That’s still a large user-base — “the global total addressable market for digital music producers alone is about 66 million,” according to Splice CEO Kakul Srivastava, “and that continues to grow at a pretty rapid pace” — though it’s not the entire world’s population.
“We were all talking about how artists are screwed, because that’s a dramatic story,” Demekin says. “To me, what’s more likely is these tools just get integrated into the existing ecosystem, and people start using it as a source for material like a Splice,” which provides artists and producers sample packs full of musical building blocks.
Caren believes the AI music tools will be taken up first by musicians, next by creators looking for sound in their videos, then by fans and “music aficionados” who want to express their appreciation for their favorite artists by making something.
“The question of how far it penetrates to people who are not significant music fans?” he asks. “I don’t know.”
On May 24, Sexyy Red and Drake teamed up on the track “U My Everything.” And in a surprise — Drake’s beef with Kendrick Lamar had seemingly ended — the track samples “BBL Drizzy” (originally created using AI by King Willonius, then remixed by Metro Boomin) during the Toronto rapper’s verse.
It’s another unexpected twist for what many are calling the first-ever AI-generated hit, “BBL Drizzy.” Though Metro Boomin’s remix went viral, his version never appeared on streaming services. “U My Everything” does, making it the first time an AI-generated sample has appeared on an official release — and posing new legal questions in the process. Most importantly: Does an artist need to clear a song with an AI-generated sample?
Trending on Billboard
“This sample is very, very novel,” says Donald Woodard, a partner at the Atlanta-based music law firm Carter Woodard. “There’s nothing like it.” Woodard became the legal representative for Willonius, the comedian and AI enthusiast who generated the original “BBL Drizzy,” after the track went viral and has been helping Willonius navigate the complicated, fast-moving business of viral music. Woodard says music publishers have already expressed interest in signing Willonius for his track, but so far, the comedian/creator is still only exploring the possibility.
Willonius told Billboard that it was “very important” to him to hire the right lawyer as his opportunities mounted. “I wanted a lawyer that understood the landscape and understood how historic this moment is,” he says. “I’ve talked to lawyers who didn’t really understand AI, but I mean, all of us are figuring it out right now.”
Working off recent guidance from the U.S. Copyright Office, Woodard says that the master recording of “BBL Drizzy” is considered “public domain,” meaning anyone can use it royalty-free and it is not protected by copyright, since Willonius created the master using AI music generator Udio. But because Willonius did write the lyrics to “BBL Drizzy,” copyright law says he should be credited and paid for the “U My Everything” sample on the publishing side. “We are focused on the human portion that we can control,” says Woodard. “You only need to clear the human side of it, which is the publishing.”
In hip-hop, it is customary to split the publishing ownership and royalties 50/50: One half is expected to go to the producer, the other is for the lyricists (who are also often the artists, too). “U My Everything” was produced by Tay Keith, Luh Ron, and Jake Fridkis, so it is likely that those three producers split that half of publishing in some fashion. The other half is what Willonius could be eligible for, along with other lyricists Drake and Sexyy Red. Woodard says the splits were solidified “post-release” on Tuesday, May 28, but declined to specify what percentage split Willonius will take home of the publishing. “I will say though,” Woodard says, cracking a smile. “He’s happy.”
Upon the release of “U My Everything,” Willonius was not listed as a songwriter on Spotify or Genius, both of which list detailed credits but can contain errors. It turns out the reason for the omission was simple: the deal wasn’t done yet. “We hammered out this deal in the 24th hour,” jokes Woodard, who adds that he was unaware that “U My Everything” sampled “BBL Drizzy” until the day of its release. “That’s just how it goes sometimes.”
It is relatively common for sample clearance negotiations to drag on long after the release of songs. Some rare cases, like Travis Scott’s epic “Sicko Mode,” which credits about 30 writers due to a myriad of samples, can take years. Willonius tells Billboard when he got the news about the “U My Everything” release, he was “about to enter a meditation retreat” in Chicago and let his lawyer “handle the business.”
This sample clearance process poses another question: should Metro Boomin be credited, too? According to Metro’s lawyer, Uwonda Carter, who is also a partner at Carter Woodard, the simple answer is no. She adds that Metro is not pursuing any ownership or royalties for “U My Everything.”
“Somehow people attach Metro to the original version of ‘BBL Drizzy,’ but he didn’t create it,” Carter says. “As long as [Drake and Sexyy Red] are only using the original version [of “BBL Drizzy”], that’s the only thing that needs to be cleared,” she continues, adding that Metro is not the type of creative “who encroaches upon work that someone else does.”
When Metro’s remix dropped on May 5, Carter says she spoke with the producer, his manager and his label, Republic Records, to discuss how they could officially release the song and capitalize on its grassroots success, but then they ultimately decided against doing a proper release. “Interestingly, the label’s position was if [Metro’s] going to exploit this song, put it up on DSPs, it’s going to need to be cleared, but nobody knew what that clearance would look like because it was obviously AI.”
She adds, “Metro decided that he wasn’t going to exploit the record because trying to clear it was going to be the Wild, Wild West.” In the end, however, the release of “U My Everything” still threw Carter Woodard into that copyright wilderness, forcing them to find a solution for their other client, Willonius.
In the future, the two lawyers predict that AI could make their producer clients’ jobs a lot easier, now that there is a precedent for getting AI-generated masters royalty-free. “It’ll be cheaper,” says Carter. “Yes, cleaner and cheaper,” says Woodard.
Carter does acknowledge that while AI sampling could help some producers with licensing woes, it could hurt others, particularly the “relatively new” phenomenon of “loop producers.” “I don’t want to minimize what they do,” she says, “but I think they have the most to be concerned about [with AI].” Carter notes that using a producer’s loops can cost 5% to 10% from the producer’s side of publishing or more. “I think that, at least in the near future, producers will start using AI sampling and AI-generated records so they could potentially bypass the loop producers.”
Songwriter-turned-publishing executive Evan Bogart previously told Billboard he feels AI could never replace “nostalgic” samples (like “First Class” by Jack Harlow’s use of “Glamorous” by Fergie or “Big Energy” by Latto’s “Fantasy” by Mariah Carey), where the old song imbues the new one with greater meaning. But he said he could foresee it being a digital alternative to crate digging for obscure samples to chop up and manipulate beyond recognition.
Though the “U My Everything” complications are over — and set a new precedent for the nascent field of AI sampling in the process — the legal complications with “BBL Drizzy” will continue for Woodard and his client. Now, they are trying to get the original song back on Spotify after it was flagged for takedown. “Some guy in Australia went in and said that he made it, not me,” says Willonius. A representative for Spotify confirms to Billboard that the takedown of “BBL Drizzy” was due to a copyright claim. “He said he made that song and put it on SoundCloud 12 years ago, and I’m like, ‘How was that possible? Nobody was even saying [BBL] 12 years ago,’” Willonius says. (Udio has previously confirmed to Billboard that its backend data shows Willonius made the song on its platform).
“I’m in conversations with them to try to resolve the matter,” says Woodard, but “unfortunately, the process to deal with these sorts of issues is not easy. Spotify requires the parties to reach a resolution and inform Spotify once this has happened.”
Though there is precedent for other “public domain” music being disqualified from earning royalties, so far, given how new this all is, there is no Spotify policy that would bar an AI-generated song from earning royalties. These songs are also allowed to stay up on the platform as long as the AI songs do not conflict with Spotify’s platform rules, says a representative from Spotify.
Despite the challenges “BBL Drizzy” has posed, Woodard says it’s remarkable, after 25 years in practice as a music attorney, that he is part of setting a precedent for something so new. “The law is still being developed and the guidelines are still being developed,” Woodard says. “It’s exciting that our firm is involved in the conversation, but we are learning as we go.”
This story is included in Billboard‘s new music technology newsletter, Machine Learnings. To subscribe to this and other Billboard newsletters, click here.
Artificial Intelligence is one of the buzziest — and most rapidly changing — areas of the music business today. A year after the fake-Drake song signaled the technology’s potential applications (and dangers), industry lobbyists on Capitol Hill, like RIAA’s Tom Clees, are working to create guard rails to protect musicians — and maybe even get them paid.
Meanwhile, entrepreneurs like Soundful’s Diaa El All and BandLab’s Meng Ru Kuok (who oversees the platform as founder and CEO of its parent company, Caldecott Music Group) are showing naysayers that AI can enhance human creativity rather than just replacing it. Technology and policy experts alike have promoted the use of ethical training data and partnered with groups like Fairly Trained and the Human Artistry Coalition to set a positive example for other entrants into the AI realm.
What is your biggest career moment with AI?
Trending on Billboard
Diaa El All: I’m proud of starting our product Soundful Collabs. We found a way to do it with the artists’ participation in an ethical way and that we’re not infringing on any of their actual copyrighted music. With Collabs, we make custom AI models that understand someone’s production techniques and allow fans to create beats inspired by those techniques.
Meng Ru Kuok: Being the first creation platform to support the Human Artistry Coalition was a meaningful one. We put our necks out there as a tech company where people would expect us to actually be against regulation of AI. We don’t think of ourselves as a tech company. We’re a music company that represents and helps creators. Protecting them in the future is so important to us.
Tom Clees: I’ve been extremely proud to see that our ideas are coming through in legislation like the No AI Fraud Act in the House [and] the No Fakes Act in the Senate.
The term “AI” represents all kinds of products and companies. What do you consider the biggest misconception around the technology?
Clees: There are so many people who work on these issues on Capitol Hill who have only ever been told that it’s impossible to train these AI platforms and do it while respecting copyright and doing it fairly, or that it couldn’t ever work at scale. (To El All and Kuok.) A lot of them don’t know enough about what you guys are doing in AI. We need to get [you both] to Washington now.
Kuok: One of the misconceptions that I educate [others about] the most, which is counterintuitive to the AI conversation, is that AI is the only way to empower people. AI is going to have a fundamental impact, but we’re taking for granted that people have access to laptops, to studio equipment, to afford guitars — but most places in the world, that isn’t the case. There are billions of people who still don’t have access to making music.
El All: A lot of companies say, “It can’t be done that way.” But there is a way to make technological advancement while protecting the artists’ rights. Meng has done it, we’ve done it, there’s a bunch of other platforms who have, too. AI is a solution, but not for everything. It’s supposed to be the human plus the technology that equals the outcome. We’re here to augment human creativity and give you another tool for your toolbox.
What predictions do you have for the future of AI and music?
Clees: I see a world where so many more people are becoming creators. They are empowered by the technologies that you guys have created. I see the relationship between the artist and fan becoming so much more collaborative.
Kuok: I’m very optimistic that everything’s going to be OK, despite obviously the need for daily pessimism to [inspire the] push for the right regulation and policy around AI. I do believe that there’s going to be even better music made in the future because you’re empowering people who didn’t necessarily have some functionality or tools. In a world where there’s so much distribution and so much content, it enhances the need for differentiation more, so that people will actually stand up and rise to the top or get even better at what they do. It’s a more competitive environment, which is scary … but I think you’re going to see successful musicians from every corner of the world.
El All: I predict that AI tools will help bring fans closer to the artists and producers they look up to. It will give accessibility to more people to be creative. If we give them access to more tools like Soundful and BandLab and protect them also, we could create a completely new creative generation.
This story will appear in the June 1, 2024, issue of Billboard.
Free music streaming shouldn’t be so free, Rob Stringer, CEO of Sony Music Entertainment, suggested Wednesday during a presentation to Sony Corp. analysts and investors.
The value of paid subscription “remains incredible,” said Stringer in prepared remarks during parent company Sony’s Business Segment Meeting 2024. But recent price increases — by Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, YouTube and, most recently, Pandora — have widened what Stringer called the “price gap” between free and paid streaming. Now, Sony wants streaming companies to get more from their free listeners.
“In mature markets, we hope that our partners close that gap by asking consumers using ad-supported services to additionally pay a modest fee,” said Stringer. “This would help develop this segment of the streaming business to be more than just a marketing funnel for paid subscription and still be a tremendous value for users. We have a shared interest in better monetization of free tiers. At Sony Music, we think everyone is willing to pay something for access to virtually the entire universe of music.”
Trending on Billboard
Free streaming provides an opportunity to attract paying subscribers but returns far less per listener than subscriptions. Even though Spotify has 62% more free listeners than subscribers, advertising accounted for just 10.7% of first-quarter revenue compared to 89.3% from subscriptions. Another round of price increases by Spotify this month in the U.K. and Australia portend additional price increases in the U.S. and other major markets. Further subscription price increases will widen the gap between premium and free streaming, and “even if advertising will become a better part of the story, it’s still a relatively small part of our overall revenue mix,” Spotify CEO Daniel Ek said during the April 23 earnings call.
Charging for ad-supported music would break from a long tradition of providing listeners with a free, on-demand streaming option. YouTube and Spotify are the two largest on-demand, ad-supported platforms that stream music. Amazon Music has a free tier with limited functionality. In the U.S., Pandora has about 39 million monthly active users for its ad-supported internet radio service that has less interactive capabilities than YouTube or Spotify. But paid, ad-supported streaming is common in the video world. Video on-demand services such as Hulu and Netflix offer low-price tiers with advertisements and charge higher prices to eliminate advertising altogether.
Sony Music also wants to extract more revenue from short-form video platforms such as TikTok that command huge audiences but provide relatively few royalties. “Premium-quality artistry drives the appeal of these services, with music being central to approximately 70% of videos created on them,” said Stringer. “These companies play a larger and larger role in music discovery and engagement amongst young listeners. More and more, these are primary consumption sources, and they need to be valued accordingly.”
Stringer, who does not comment during the parent company’s quarterly earnings calls, spoke and answered questions for 40 minutes about Sony Music artists, chart successes, growth opportunities and efforts in emerging markets. After highlighting Sony Music’s efforts in Latin America, India and China, he focused on the newest — and most vexing — technology on the music industry’s horizon. Artificial intelligence, he said, “represents a generational inflection point for music” and Sony Music will take “an active role” in creating a “sustainable business model” that respects the company’s rights.
But Stringer was clear that Sony Music is taking a hard line in the battle to shape AI in music. “We won’t tolerate the illicit training of AI models by reckless and unlicensed misuse of this art,” he warned. “We believe strongly that permission is the only way AI models can be trained with our content, and followed protocols of the EU AI act by sending over 700 letters to AI developers to opt our copyrights out of training.” Sony Music has also issued “over 20,000 takedowns of AI generated soundalikes over the past year,” he added, while working with legislators around the world “to shape policy and rights” on AI issues.
“With the right frameworks in place, innovation will thrive, technology, music will benefit and consumers will enjoy your experiences,” Stringer said. “We have prospered from disruptive market changes before so we are confident we can navigate this chapter successfully.”
When Sabrina Carpenter signed with the Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG) in October 2023, she was coming off the critical and commercial success of her 2022 Island Records debut Emails I Can’t Send, a project that established her as a formidable pop hitmaker with a distinct voice and a captivating appeal. But since that album’s release, her career has launched into the stratosphere, with a string of singles — “Nonsense” off the original Emails; “Feather,” which was released on the deluxe of Emails in August 2023; and, most recently, April 2024’s “Espresso” — that have each reached higher on the charts than the last, building her into a mainstream dynamo with song-of-the-summer hitmaking potential.
It’s been “Espresso,” however, that has truly captured the zeitgeist. The song zoomed onto the Billboard Hot 100 with a No. 7 debut, eventually reaching No. 4, but has done even better globally, reaching No. 1 on the Billboard Global Excl. U.S. chart — where it spends its second week this week, establishing it as a bona fide international hit. And through the work of her label at Island and her publishing company UMPG, that’s marked the highest chart placement of Carpenter’s career — and help earned UMPG co-head of U.S. A&R and head of UMPG’s global creative group David Gray the title of Billboard’s Executive of the Week.
Trending on Billboard
Here, Gray discusses the work UMPG has done with Carpenter in the six months since bringing her into the pubco, what sets her apart as a songwriter and the company’s global outlook. “She has always had a vision for herself as an artist and songwriter,” Gray says. “It’s rewarding to see her succeed at a global level and get all of the credit she deserves.”
This week, Sabrina Carpenter’s “Espresso” spends its second week at No. 1 on the Billboard Global Excl. U.S. chart and its fifth week in the top 10 of the Hot 100. What key decision did you make to help make that happen?
Overall at UMPG, we work to support our songwriters’ ideas and decisions in any way we can, whether putting together strategic writing sessions or working to secure great synch opportunities globally.
Sabrina signed with UMPG last October. What were your first conversations like with her about her music and where she wanted to go?
Sabrina talked about how the Emails I Can’t Send album was a step up from where she was before and she was ready to take it up to the next level from there. She has always had a vision for herself as an artist and songwriter. It’s rewarding to see her succeed at a global level and get all of the credit she deserves.
What sets Sabrina apart from other pop stars as a songwriter, and how have you helped to emphasize that?
Sabrina has such a unique and brilliant songwriting voice, both lyrically and melodically. All the years of doing sessions, working hard, taking songwriting very seriously and perfecting her craft has made her not only the artist in the writing session… but she is also an A-list-level songwriter talent-wise.
For the past two years you’ve headed up UMPG’s global creative group. How has that changed how you work with songwriters, and in what ways does it help your global reach?
At UMPG, we have always recognized that there are amazing writing opportunities for songwriters outside of their own territories. The number and quality of these writing opportunities has accelerated in the last few years. The communication between territories that the Global Creative Group provides is essential to making sure our writers get the best of these opportunities.
How are you preparing to deal with AI in the publishing world?
It’s still nascent in the broader creative community, but we know AI offers opportunities and risks. We embrace AI, just as we have other technology innovations in the past, but only AI technology that is ethical and artist-centric — in other words, only if it supports songwriters and protects their rights.
Voice-Swap, an ethically-trained AI voice company, and BMAT Music Innovators, a company that indexes music usage and ownership data using machine learning, have partnered to launch a new technical certification for AI voice and music models. It is designed to verify that the audio content used to train voice models does not infringe on any […]
NASHVILLE — Ahead of the 2024 Music Biz conference, Music Business Association president Portia Sabin predicted that artificial intelligence would be the most hotly-discussed topic.
“AI is the big one that everyone’s talking about,” she told Billboard.
That premonition proved true during the current conference (held in Nashville May 13-16), as dozens of speakers across the spectrum of music, tech, legal and more discussed AI’s uncertain future in the space, and its current impact on the industry.
One such panel was “How AI and Tech Are Shaping the Business of Music” on Monday (May 13). Moderated by Elizabeth Brooks, managing partner at Better Angels Venture, the panelists—head of artist marketing and digital strategy at Friends At Work, Jeremy Gruber; senior vp of product and technology at MAX, Jeff Rosenfeld; MADKAT founder Maddy Sundquist; and singer-songwriter Stephen Day — discussed the emergence of AI in music, some of the concerns surrounding its potential impact on artist creativity, and how artists can maintain an authentic connection to their fans.
Trending on Billboard
As the sole artist on the panel, Day kicked off the AI portion of the discussion and countered that, despite the recent uptick in the use of generative AI in popular music — most recently with Drake on “Taylor Made Freestyle,” the diss track in which he uses AI to recreate Snoop Dogg and the late Tupac Shakur’s voices, which has since been taken down after the Shakur estate threatened to take legal action — he’s not concerned about generative AI’s emergence. “Overall, I’m not really scared about it because technology has always advanced,” he said. “The human with the heart and the soul is what makes it important.”
Rosenfeld agreed, adding that “technology continually upends the business of music,” pointing to social media as an example of something that changed digital marketing strategies for artists and labels. One group that could be at risk though, he said, are artists that people don’t have a direct connection with, like film/TV composers. “It’s the personal connection [that fans are after]. It is the person and their story behind the music that people relate to,” he said. “And that’s why it’s important to have a relationship with your fans.”
Rosenfeld isn’t the first exec to note that risk for artists who make instrumental music. In a 2023 Billboard story, Oleg Stavitsky, co-founder/CEO of AI-driven functional sound company Endel, pointed to “functional music” (that is, a type of audio “not designed for conscious listening”) as an area of focus for their firm. While the company isn’t in the business of making hits, it’s focused on making music that promotes sleep or relaxation (lo-fi music, ambient electronics, etc.) with help from AI tools. Another company, LifeScore, which uses AI to “create unique, real-time soundtracks for every journey,” recruited James Blake to create an AI ambient soundtrack titled Wind Down.
While that’s a threat to that corner of the market, the panelists were largely optimistic, albeit cautiously, about AI’s future impact.
“AI is not our overlord today,” Brooks said. Added Rosenfeld, “It’s enabled small businesses to expand… It’s destabilizing, but at the same time empowering.”
At a separate panel on Wednesday (May 15) titled “How AI Is Changing the Way We Market, Promote & Sell Music,” the speakers also had a positive outlook on AI in the industry. Moderated by co-founder and CEO of 24/7 Artists, Yudu Gray, Jr., the panel featured chief product officer of SymphonyOS, Chuka Chase; head of communications & creator insights at BandLab Technologies, Dani Deahl; and Visionary Rising founder LaTecia Johnson.
Chase said that his company has used AI to streamline the process of finding and growing an audience for artists. One way has been to use AI to build a setlist for an emerging artist’s first tour. Chase explained that his team was able to harness AI by sending out emails and putting out polls in order to gain insight into what that artist should perform in each city. “We went into the CRM and blasted emails to put out polls, a microsite asking what songs [that artist] should perform. After a couple hours we got around 20,000 responses,” he said, adding that he could then plug that data into GPT and make a setlist based on the most-requested songs.
For Deahl, who’s also a DJ and music producer, AI has helped with delegating various administrative tasks. “One of the biggest hurdles that artists now have to overcome is they don’t have to just worry about the creative components… They have to worry about all these different facets of their business.” She argues that any tool that gives her the ability to “cut out the BS” and give her the time to focus on the creative process is the best way to help her amplify her work. “Not every artist is built to be an entrepreneur,” she said.
Several companies are beginning to launch similar “AI assistants” for these kinds of admin roles. Last month, for example, Venice Music launched a new tool called Co-Manager “to educate artists on the business and marketing of music, so artists can spend more time focused on their creative vision,” Suzy Ryoo, co-founder and president of the company, said in a statement at the time. The idea is to, as Deahl said, give artists more time to be artists.
To that end, as AI tools become more prominent, the humans on an artist’s team are now more crucial than ever. While AI tools perhaps shrink the size of an artist’s team due to their functionality, Deahl doesn’t envision a world in which human roles are fully replaced. “I don’t worry about replacement when it comes to the people I engage with,” she said. “It would be a really lonely road for me as an artist if the only things that I relied on were AI chatbots or tools that tell me what my strategy should be. I need human feedback.”