Jared Brenner’s latest article in Forbes examines how the use of generative AI in music has completely upended the industry, and outlines practical steps for rights holders seeking to protect their work.
In his article, “AI Sampling And Royalties: Do You Get Paid If A Bot Samples Your Song?” Jared draws a critical distinction between traditional sampling and AI training, which AI developers have been conflating as legally analogous despite their inherent differences. He also explores the controversial fair use defense AI developers have invoked as justification for ingesting artists' catalogs without a license: that training on existing works is transformative and educational rather than reproductive.
Sony, UMG, and WBD are currently suing the biggest AI platforms allowing models to train from music catalogs, alleging that the unauthorized ingestion of copyrighted recordings as training data constitutes infringement regardle ss of what the model ultimately produces.
“Until the litigation surrounding training data reaches a climax, there is no statutory ‘AI royalty,’” Jared writes. "We are seeing 'ethical AI' programs and opt-in licensing models emerge, but these are voluntary gestures in a market that usually only pays when forced.”
“Rights holders need to audit their digital distribution agreements immediately to ensure they haven’t inadvertently signed away AI training rights,” Jared stresses. “Keep your eyes and ears open for news on the Suno and Udio cases. That’s where the future of your mechanicals is being decided.”
