Glonce

Universal, Sony and Warner propose rules to bar AI songs from charts

policyThe Glonce editorsThe Verge🔥61Glonce rating61Impact65Novelty40Relevance85Surprise35Players55Credibility80
Universal, Sony and Warner propose rules to bar AI songs from charts

Universal Music Group, Sony Music and Warner Music Group, the industry's ‘big three,’ have proposed a set of rules governing when AI-assisted songs can qualify for official charts. The short version: most would not qualify at all. The proposal goes further than an earlier plan put forth by the RIAA, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), SAG-AFTRA and others, which only called for standardized labels marking a track as AI-generated or AI-assisted. The labels' version keeps that labeling requirement but adds a gate: a song that fails to meet the criteria would not appear on international charts at all.

Under the proposal, a recording made with generative AI must not be included on official charts unless it meets six conditions. The AI service used to make it must be properly authorized and lawful. The song must be, in the labels' phrasing, ‘substantially human made.’ It must not raise stream or chart manipulation concerns. It must comply with applicable law, including copyright, related rights and personality rights. Releasing it must not breach the terms of service of the AI tool used to make it, meaning the model must hold rights to whatever data it was trained on. And any use of generative AI in making the track must be clearly signalled to listeners on streaming platforms, in line with applicable legislation or industry labeling standards.

What exactly counts as ‘substantially human made’ or a ‘stream or chart manipulation concern’ is left undefined. Sony Music, Universal Music Group and independent label Mom+Pop Music did not immediately respond to requests for clarification. The IFPI has thrown its weight behind the proposal, but as of the report, no charting organization had signaled any immediate plan to actually adopt the rules.

Key facts

  • Universal Music Group, Sony Music and Warner Music Group, the 'big three' major labels, have proposed chart-eligibility rules for AI-made songs.
  • To qualify for the charts, a song would have to be 'substantially human made,' a term the source itself calls vague and undefined.
  • The plan goes further than an earlier RIAA, IFPI and SAG-AFTRA proposal, which only called for AI labeling; the labels' version also excludes non-compliant songs from international charts.
  • Other conditions: the AI service used must be authorized and lawful, the model must hold rights to its training data, and the release must not raise 'stream or chart manipulation concerns.'
  • The IFPI backs the proposal, but no charting organization has committed to adopting it, and Sony, UMG and Mom+Pop Music did not respond to requests for clarification.

Why it matters

This is the music industry's biggest labels trying to set the rules for how AI-made music interacts with the charts that shape what listeners see as popular, before any charting organization has done so itself. Going beyond a labeling-only proposal to an outright eligibility gate would mark a real shift: instead of just disclosing that a song used AI, a track judged not 'substantially human made' would be excluded from the charts entirely.

Who it affects

Musicians and producers who use AI tools anywhere in writing, performing or producing a track, since they would need to clear all six conditions to keep chart eligibility. It also affects streaming platforms and international charting organizations, who would be the ones deciding whether to adopt the rules, and the trade groups behind the earlier, narrower labeling proposal (RIAA, SAG-AFTRA), whose plan this one builds on.

How to use it

There is no product here to use, only a proposed rulebook. For an artist or label weighing whether a track would qualify, the proposal points to six checks: the AI service must be authorized and lawful, the song must be substantially human made, it must not raise manipulation concerns, it must comply with copyright and related law, it must not breach the AI tool's terms of service, and AI use must be disclosed to listeners on the streaming platform in line with any applicable labeling rules.

How solid is it

The source is a single report describing a formal proposal from named organizations, with the IFPI publicly backing it, which gives it some institutional weight. But it remains just a proposal: no charting organization has signaled any plan to adopt it, and Sony Music, Universal Music Group and Mom+Pop Music all did not immediately respond to requests for clarification on how the vague terms would be applied in practice.

Risks and caveats

The proposal's central terms, 'substantially human made' and 'stream or chart manipulation concerns,' are undefined, and the source explicitly flags this as unclear. Without a charting organization committing to adopt the rules, or a definition of what qualifies, the proposal risks staying a statement of intent rather than a working standard, and its practical bar for artists is currently impossible to judge.

“They are substantially human made.”

— the major labels' proposed chart-eligibility criteria