Major labels want AI songs kept off charts unless they are “substantially human made”

Lead

AI music is no longer just a novelty on the edge of streaming platforms. It is now pushing into one of the music industry’s most valuable systems: the official charts. According to The Verge, several record labels, including Universal Music Group, Sony Music, and Warner Music Group, have proposed rules that would determine whether songs made with generative AI should be eligible for chart placement.

The short version is that many would not be. Under the proposal, recordings developed with generative AI services should be excluded from official charts when there is reason to believe they fail to meet several conditions, including being “substantially human made.”

Key points

• The proposal goes beyond disclosure. Industry groups including the RIAA, IFPI, SAG-AFTRA, and others have supported standardized labels for AI-generated and AI-assisted music. The labels’ proposal keeps the disclosure requirement but adds a much stronger consequence: chart ineligibility.
• Human authorship becomes the central test. Songs would need to be substantially human-made to qualify. That phrase is doing a lot of work, and The Verge notes that its precise meaning remains vague.
• AI services must be lawful and authorized. The proposal says any generative AI tools used to develop a recording must be properly authorized and legal.
• Training rights matter. The model involved would need to have rights to the data it was trained on, a requirement that directly connects chart eligibility to the broader copyright fight around AI training.
• Manipulation concerns are included. The rules also say the recording must not raise concerns about stream or chart manipulation, though the specific threshold is not explained.
• Nothing has been adopted yet. IFPI has backed the labels’ position, but no charting organization has announced an immediate plan to put the rules in place.

Why it matters

Charts are not just symbolic rankings. They influence artist visibility, marketing budgets, playlist momentum, commercial deals, and cultural legitimacy. If low-cost AI tracks can be generated at scale and pushed through streaming systems, labels worry that charts could become less reflective of human artists and more vulnerable to industrialized content production.

At the same time, the proposal raises hard questions. Modern music already depends on software: synthesizers, samplers, pitch correction, digital workstations, and algorithmic tools are part of ordinary production. Generative AI can also be used in many different ways, from brainstorming lyrics to creating a full vocal performance. Drawing a line between assistance and authorship will not be simple.

For now, the proposal reads less like an enforceable global rule and more like a signal from the major labels: transparency alone may not be enough. The next phase of AI music governance may focus on eligibility, rights verification, and how much human creative control a song must have before it can compete on official charts.

Source: The Verge AI