The co-CEO of music streaming platform Spotify, Alex Norström, has continued to claim that the company’s decision to move to AI-generated music is a better option than AI slop and piracy.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The company recently unveiled a new feature which will allow premium users to make their own, AI-generated song covers and remixes with music from other artists who choose to take part.
This new paid add-on is part of a deal with Universal Music Group and will be available on Spotify’sapp. According to the platform, the tool could create an additional income stream for songwriters and artists, on top of royalties.
However, it is unknown which artists will take part in this licensing deal at the moment, with Universal Music also representing major artists like Arianda Grande, Taylor Swift and Billie Eilish.
“Solving hard problems for music is what Spotify does, and fan-made covers and remixes are next,” Norström said in a statement. “What we’re building is grounded in consent, credit, and compensation for the artists and songwriters that take part.
“Through each technological transformation, we have worked together with Sir Lucian [Grainge, Chairman and CEO of Universal Music Group] and his team to evolve the music ecosystem into a richer, more beneficial experience for fans and a more rewarding outcome for artists and songwriters.”
However, exact details about how this new service will work, such as whether AI remixes will be private or shareable, are yet to be revealed. Another concern is how Spotify could label shareable user-generated AI content.
“The most valuable innovations in the music business always bring artists and fans closer together,” Grainge said. “That principle is at the heart of this pioneering AI-enabled superfan initiative, which is designed to support human artistry, deepen fan relationships, and create additional revenue opportunities for artists and songwriters.”
Euronews Next has contacted Spotify for comment.
Could Spotify’s new move marginalise human artists?
Despite Norström insisting that Spotify’s new feature is an attempt to distinguish carefully curated AI music from slop, several artists continue to be concerned that human artists may be pushed out of the industry.
One of the biggest concerns is that greater competition from AI-generated music could lead to more and more artists reluctantly taking part in the feature, which may create a vicious cycle of sorts.
“I think if you are going to have AI music, it’s clearly better that you have AI music that is rooted in consent,” Ed Newton-Rex, a composer and campaigner for artists’ copyright said, as reported by The Guardian.
“The big question will be whether fans can share remixes they make for other people to listen to,” he added. “If they can, I think you get into dangerous territory. These AI remixes will flood Spotify and drown out other songs, which will in turn put pressure on more musicians to sign up to the AI remix feature.”
This comes as more listeners appear unconcerned about whether a track is created by a human or generated using AI – so long as they enjoy the music. AI-generated songs have already been topping music charts in the last year, highlighting growing demand.
Major tech companies like OpenAI and Meta have already been sued for allegedly using content from newspapers, books and other copyrighted sources without consent to train AI models.
There are also concerns of AI music diluting royalties, leaving even less income for human artists, as well as impersonation of styles, voices, and likeness without consent.
Currently, Spotify uses a Verified by Spotify badge and internal detection technology to help users distinguish human artists from AI and spam.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.euronews.com ’
