29 Music Organizations Are Demanding Artist Consent Before AI Deals. Here Is What That Means for You.
Major labels and publishers have struck nearly 300 AI licensing agreements globally, many without consulting the artists and songwriters whose work they cover. A coalition of 29 music organizations is now demanding this stop.
Short answer
On June 22, 2026, 29 artist, songwriter, and music manager organizations, coordinated by the European Music Managers Alliance (EMMA), published an open letter to major labels and publishers demanding three things: no default opt-ins to AI licensing, no forced AI clauses in artist contracts, and no use of artists' work for AI training without meaningful consent and fair remuneration. The letter names a specific concern: rightsholders have signed nearly 300 AI licensing deals globally, often acting without consulting the artists and songwriters whose rights are at stake. Signatories include the Featured Artists Coalition, Music Artists Coalition, Ivors Academy, SONA, and organizations across a dozen countries. The letter does not itself create legal obligations, but it puts specific demands on record from organizations that collectively represent a large portion of the working artist community.
Key takeaways
- On June 22, 2026, 29 artist, songwriter, and music manager organizations published an open letter demanding labels and publishers stop signing AI deals without meaningful artist consent.
- The letter names three specific demands: no default opt-ins to AI licensing, no forced AI clauses in contracts, and no use of an artist's work, voice, or likeness without fair remuneration and full transparency.
- Rightsholders have already signed nearly 300 AI licensing agreements globally, many without consulting the artists and songwriters whose rights are at stake.
- If you are self-releasing, your distributor agreement may contain AI licensing opt-in clauses. It is worth checking before your next upload.
What happened?
On June 22, 2026, the European Music Managers Alliance (EMMA) coordinated an open letter signed by 29 artist, songwriter, and music manager organizations. The letter, addressed to major labels and publishers, responds to a specific pattern: rightsholders are signing AI licensing agreements that cover the work of artists and songwriters they represent, often without those creatives being meaningfully consulted.
The letter outlines three core demands: no default opt-ins to AI-related uses, no forced AI clauses in artist and songwriter agreements, and no use of any artist’s work, voice, performance, likeness, or creative identity without meaningful consent, fair remuneration, and full transparency.
Music organizations signing the open letter
AI licensing deals struck by rightsholders globally
Core demands: no default opt-ins, no forced clauses, meaningful consent
Legal obligations created by the letter (it is a public statement, not a rule)
Signatories include the Featured Artists Coalition, Music Artists Coalition, SONA, NITO, the Ivors Academy, and management bodies from across Europe, North America, and Australia. The letter is coordinated by EMMA but signed by organizations across a dozen countries, which means it reflects a broader coalition than any single market.
Why independent artists should care
The letter targets a specific structural problem: labels and publishers hold rights that cover artists’ and songwriters’ work, and they can, under some contract terms, license those rights to third parties, including AI companies, without getting the individual artist’s sign-off.
If you are signed to a label or a publisher, your work may already be licensed for AI training under a deal your label signed. The terms of your own recording or publishing agreement determine whether you have recourse and whether you receive any share of that income.
If you are self-releasing and distributing through DistroKid, TuneCore, CD Baby, or a similar platform, you hold your master rights and your label is not making AI deals on your behalf. But your distributor agreement is worth reading. Some distributors have added clauses related to AI licensing, and the difference between an explicit opt-in and a default opt-in matters a lot for what you are agreeing to.
Creatives are not being meaningfully consulted despite being the primary holders of many of the rights at stake. Innovation cannot be used to override artists’ rights.
| Signed artist | Self-releasing artist | |
|---|---|---|
| Who controls your master rights | Your label (for the term of the deal) | You |
| Can a label sign an AI deal without your direct consent | Depends on your contract terms | No. Your distributor cannot assign your rights to a third party without your consent. |
| Where risk of opt-in defaults exists | Label-level AI licensing agreements | Your distribution or publishing admin agreement |
| Action you can take now | Read your recording contract; ask your manager or lawyer about AI clauses | Read your distributor terms of service, especially any AI or data use sections |
What to do now
Check your distributor terms
If you distribute through any platform, pull up your current subscriber or artist agreement and search for the words “artificial intelligence,” “machine learning,” “training data,” and “opt-in.” If your distributor has an AI licensing opt-in and it is set by default, you are worth knowing about before you upload your next release.
If you are signed to a label
The open letter creates no new legal obligations on your label. What it does do is put specific, named demands on the record from organizations representing most of the working artist community. If you are concerned about AI licensing in your label deal, the place to start is your contract and, if you have one, your manager or entertainment lawyer. This is the moment to ask those questions, not after the deal is signed.
What is still unclear?
Open questions
The open letter is a statement, not a rule. Labels and publishers are not legally required to comply with its demands, and none have publicly committed to changing their AI deal practices in response to it yet. What effect it has depends on whether the organizations that signed it, and artists directly, use it as leverage in contract negotiations. The letter also does not address existing AI deals already signed before June 22 or what happens to royalties from those earlier agreements. How the roughly 300 already-signed AI deals divide income between rightsholders and the artists and songwriters those rightsholders represent is not specified by any public source.
Sources
Related Velveteen guides
Get music industry updates without the noise
Short notes on platform changes, royalty issues, and release marketing moves that actually affect independent artists.
Was this useful? Send a signal or flag a correction.