Blog

AI is quickly reshaping our daily lives, including the entertainment we seek in books, films and music. When it comes to the creation of new music, there are some critical issues artists and labels have to address: how to determine ownership, share revenues in a fair way, deal with AI in a responsible way, protection of true artistry. Understanding these developments is essential for artists finding their way in this ever changing landscape.Key Considerations for AI in Music Contracts1. Ownership &amp; AI-Generated MusicWith AI composing and replicating voices, ownership is a growing concern.· &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Labels may require artists to confirm whether work is human-made or AI-generated.· &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; AI-generated elements (and identified as such) in recordings might be treated as label-owned assets, similar to session musician contributions.2. Use of Artist's Voice &amp; LikenessAI cloning of voices makes rewriting of name and likeness clauses necessary.Some artist contracts grant labels rights to use AI-generated versions of an artist’s voice. On the other hand, artists with sufficient clout manage to negotiate consent clauses preventing unauthorized AI replication of their voice. 3. Revenue Sharing &amp; AI DerivativesFair compensation for AI-generated/enhanced music is under discussion.More and more, contracts now specify how royalties are split for AI-enhanced works. AI Detection Tools may likely be of in case of disputes about the proportion of AI-enhanced/generated elements. 4. AI Training RestrictionsArtists are trying to push for controls over AI training on their past recordings.Some contracts prevent labels from using recordings for AI training without consent.&nbsp; However, other agreements force AI companies to properly license artists’ work before allowing them to upload such recordings. 5. AI Detection ToolsCompanies are developing AI detection technology to protect artists.Platforms like YouTube and Deezer and monitoring companies such as Audible Magic use AI detection to distinguish between human-made and AI-generated music. Future agreements may require verification of track origins. ConclusionAI is transforming the music industry, making it essential for artists to stay informed. As contracts evolve, balancing innovation with creative rights protection is critical. We advise artists to carefully review agreements and seek legal advice to ensure fair treatment in this evolving landscape.

AI and Music Contracts: Key Things to Consider

Hand pointing at the musical score of the heart shape padlock on the chalkboard

Christmas songs hold a special place in our hearts, bringing warmth and joy to the festive season. While they might seem like fleeting traditions—popping up for a month and then vanishing—they’re far more than "one-day flies." Their impact transcends their brief annual spotlight, leaving a lasting cultural and emotional legacy.These songs evoke powerful nostalgia, connecting generations through shared memories of holiday cheer. Classics like Silent Night or All I Want for Christmas Is You tap into universal feelings of love, hope, and togetherness. For performing artists, Christmas music offers a unique opportunity to connect with audiences on an emotional level while showcasing their artistry in a timeless genre.Economically, holiday songs also play a pivotal role in the music industry. They spark yearly revivals in streaming, sales, and licensing, benefiting creators and rights holders alike. This recurring demand ensures these songs remain relevant, proving their enduring value.So, while Christmas songs may dominate airwaves for only a few weeks, their cultural and financial impact resonates year-round. Far from being one-hit wonders, they are enduring symbols of celebration, joy, and unity—a gift that keeps on giving.Happy holidays and happy listening!

The Importance of Christmas Songs: More Than Just One-Day Flies

Conductor's baton and sheet music on black background, closeup view

In early 2024, the UK embarked on a pivotal consultation to potentially revise its copyright laws, particularly focusing on the rights associated with foreign sound recordings and performances. This initiative, led by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), aimed to align UK copyright law with international treaties more effectively.Current Legal Landscape: The UK's existing copyright framework currently offers differing levels of protection for recordings and performances. Recordings can qualify for remuneration if first published in the UK or a qualifying country, or if the producer is a national or resident of such countries. Performances, however, only receive protection if carried out in a qualifying country or by an artist from such country – one that signed the Rome Convention, like the UK.The Government’s Decision: After reviewing industry feedback and assessing economic impacts, the UK government has now decided to leave the current situation intact and additionally extend protection of performances by non-Rome Convention nationals insofar recordings of their performances were made by producers from the UK or Rome Convention countries.The decision is expected to have little impact on industry revenue leaving the UK.&nbsp;The government expects to implement the change in December 2024 via secondary legislation under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act.

UK Government Initiates Copyright Law Consultation

Music has always played a vital role in political campaigns, helping to energize crowds and craft an emotional narrative. However, using music in this setting is a sensitive matter for many artists, especially when it's associated with campaigns they don't support. Imagine hearing your song used to promote a politician whose views you oppose—it's frustrating and often leads to public disputes. That's why political campaigns must strictly adhere to licensing rules to avoid damaging legal battles and negative publicity.A recent example illustrates how serious this issue can get. In September 2024, British musician Eddy Grant won a lawsuit against Donald Trump for using his hit song “Electric Avenue” without permission in a campaign video. Grant argued that the unauthorized use not only violated copyright laws but also falsely implied his political endorsement. This case serves as a stark reminder: neglecting proper music licensing can result in legal repercussions and public relations disasters.Grant's case isn't an isolated one. Many prominent artists, including Tom Petty, The Rolling Stones, Rihanna, Pharrell Williams, and Neil Young, have previously filed complaints and issued cease-and-desist orders when their music was used without authorization in political settings. These artists expressed concerns that the unauthorized use of their music implied support for political ideologies they did not endorse, sparking public disputes and media coverage. For campaigns, these situations highlight the importance of securing proper licenses.So, what licenses are required? The most common use of music in campaigns involves incorporating songs into videos or commercials, which requires a synchronization license from the song's publisher. If an existing recording is used, a separate license from the record label is also needed. It’s a two-step process that, if overlooked, can result in infringement claims.Public performances of music at campaign events add another layer of complexity. At a minimum, campaigns must obtain a performance license, but specific venues may require additional special performance licenses. Additionally, U.S. Performance Rights Organizations (PROs) can demand that certain songs be excluded from a campaign’s license, making navigation of this landscape even more challenging.The cases involving Eddy Grant and other artists underscore the importance of respecting artists' rights. For campaigns, the takeaway is clear: securing and double-checking all necessary licenses is essential. Proper licensing ensures that music can amplify a message without crossing legal or ethical lines. Music can elevate a campaign, but when misused, it can become an expensive public relations nightmare. Choose wisely!

Music in Political Campaigns: Why Proper Licensing Is Non-Negotiable

Earth Globe with musical notes around, 3D rendering isolated on white background.

Neighbouring rightsare becoming an increasingly important revenue stream for recording rights-holders worldwide. Once a modest source of income, these rights now represent a significant portion of global music industry revenues. Traditionally, Europe has been the epicenter of these earnings, driven by broadcasting and public performance rights. However, there’s a noticeable shift as emerging markets in Asia and Africa begin to play a larger role.Countries like Indonesia, the Philippines, and China are now establishing frameworks to better manage and enforce neighbouring rights, despite facing challenges like regulatory complexities and organizational conflicts. In Africa, the music industry is witnessing rapid growth, particularly in the more southern regions, where countries like South Africa are trying to set the example. Although the continent faces hurdles, including inadequate licensing infrastructures and a lack of comprehensive music data, there is growing optimism as more nations develop sophisticated rights management systems.Data accuracy and efficient distribution are key to maximizing the potential of neighbouring rights. Global initiatives are underway to standardize these processes, ensuring that this revenue stream continues to grow. As the music industry evolves, neighbouring rights are set to become an even more vital source of income for rights-holders.

The Growing Importance of Neighbouring Rights in the Music Industry

In early 2024, the UK embarked on a pivotal consultation to potentially revise its copyright laws, particularly focusing on the rights associated with foreign sound recordings and performances. This initiative, led by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), is set to enhance how these recordings and performances qualify for domestic copyright protection, aiming to align with international treaties more effectively.Current Legal Landscape: The UK's existing copyright framework offers differing levels of protection for recordings and performances. Recordings can qualify for remuneration if first published in the UK or a qualifying country, or if the producer is a national or resident of such countries. Performances, however, only receive protection if performed by a UK national or in a qualifying country—signatories to treaties like the Rome Convention and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.Challenges &amp; Proposed Changes: This distinction has led to a scenario where US record labels receive performance royalties, but US artists often do not. To address such disparities, the IPO has formulated three options:Universal Equitable Remuneration: Extending rights more broadly to all foreign rightsholders, which could increase UK public-performance revenues for US artists. Reciprocal Rights: Remunerating foreign rightsholders only if their countries offer similar rights to UK nationals—potentially relieving UK music users from fees for US repertoire. Balanced Approach: A mix of both policies, ensuring full protection for existing foreign recordings while limiting rights for new ones. Implications for the Music Industry: These amendments carry significant financial implications and risks, with all parties being most concerned about the second and third options.&nbsp;

Zanoise blog

AI and Music Contracts: Key Things to Consider

The Importance of Christmas Songs: More Than Just One-Day...

UK Government Initiates Copyright Law Consultation

Music in Political Campaigns: Why Proper Licensing Is Non...

The Growing Importance of Neighbouring Rights in the Musi...

Will US Artists Qualify For PPL Royalties Soon? UK Govern...