By Idan Dobrecki, CEO of Aiode
Streaming platforms are being inundated with machine-generated music. Deezer recently reported that more than 20,000 AI-created tracks are uploaded to its service each day. Much of this content is never meaningfully engaged with by listeners, yet it still populates libraries, distorts recommendation algorithms, and occupies real estate once reserved for human-created work. This proliferation presents complex questions about authorship, value, and the future of creative labor.
Artificial intelligence, particularly generative models, has enabled the rapid creation of music-like content. Some systems generate full tracks with minimal input, drawing on massive libraries of existing material to produce output that mimics familiar styles. At first listen, these tracks appear relatively polished, but they usually lack the narrative structure, emotional dynamics, and originality that characterize human-created music. The blurring of the line between imitation and artistry raises concerns about how audiences assign value and how creators maintain ownership.
This phenomenon is already reshaping cultural expectations. Consider the viral case of a song that appeared to feature Drake and The Weeknd, which was generated by an anonymous user without their consent. It circulated widely before being pulled from streaming services. Grimes responded to this growing trend with a different approach. She openly licensed her voice for AI use under a revenue-sharing model. These responses illustrate how little consensus currently exists around attribution and consent in generative audio.
From a legal standpoint, the foundation remains relatively clear. Under U.S. copyright law, only works created by humans are eligible for protection. An AI system that produces a composition entirely on its own cannot claim authorship. Similar rules apply elsewhere. In South Korea, for example, authorities recently confirmed that AI-generated works are not eligible for copyright protection under current law. These policies reflect a broader global consensus: authorship is tied to human contribution. Where AI functions as a tool, the resulting work may qualify for protection. Where it acts independently, it does not.
This distinction matters. Platforms and tools that prioritize human agency, keeping the creator in control, are better aligned with legal protections. They also offer a more sustainable path for artists who want to work with AI rather than be displaced by it.
Creative professionals are asking how AI should be used in music. Much of the current commercial focus has prioritized replication. This model may serve short-form or utility-based needs. At the same time, it reduces emphasis on originality and intent.
I believe there is a different approach worth exploring. AI can be structured as a creative partner. Tools can be designed to enhance musicianship, suggest compositional directions, or respond dynamically to a performer’s input. These systems preserve the artist’s creative role, provide greater clarity around ownership and authorship, and lower technical hurdles, keeping the artist’s attention where it belongs – on the music itself.
This conversation deserves immediate attention. Algorithms are playing an active role across the music ecosystem. They are shaping how songs are generated, how they are categorized and recommended, how royalties are calculated, and how rights are tracked. The choices made by developers, platform architects, and policymakers are already influencing the future of music. Their decisions will shape how creative work is produced, how it reaches listeners, and how its value is defined.
There’s still time to shape this evolution with intention. Technological progress is inevitable, but its impact isn’t predetermined. The systems we build today will define how creativity is valued tomorrow. By embracing a thoughtful, human-centric approach to AI, we can chart a more sustainable path – one that amplifies artistic agency and expands the boundaries of what’s creatively possible.
Idan Dobrecki is the CEO and founder of Aiode, an AI-powered music platform that supports human-led composition. He is a licensed attorney with a background in advanced mathematics and the arts, and his work focuses on the intersection of technology, authorship, and creative rights.