Music Industry

Creatives Confront the Inevitability of AI in Music, Push for Fairness and Transparency

Credit: Outlever

Key Points

  • The rise of AI-made music raises two main challenges: compensating artists whose work trains the models and giving listeners clarity on what they’re hearing.
  • Chris Ferguson, a Professor of Psychology at Stetson University, argues that the real issue isn’t stopping AI but ensuring fairness and transparency in how it’s used.
  • He calls for clear labeling on streaming platforms and fair pay for creators, believing that guiding AI ethically is the only way to make its growth sustainable.
Chris Ferguson - Professor of Psychology | Stetson University
It's not that AI music shouldn't exist. It's that it's being built on the work of people who never agreed to be part of it and aren't seeing a cent in return. Until we fix that, it’s hard to call any of this real progress.Chris Ferguson - Professor of Psychology | Stetson University

The debate over AI-made music shouldn't be about pulling the plug. It should be about learning to play in tune. The industry knows the machines aren’t going away, so the real question now is how to make them play fair. With lawsuits and deals like Universal Music's settlement with Udio setting the tone, the spotlight is on two things that matter most: paying creators for their work and giving listeners the truth about what they’re hearing.

Chris Ferguson, a Professor of Psychology at Stetson University, sees today’s debate over AI music as history repeating itself. His research on media effects shows that every new creative technology sparks the same mix of excitement and unease before finding its place. He argues that AI music isn’t breaking tradition but continuing it, challenging us to shape progress with fairness and transparency in mind.

"The fact that this art is being trained on human artists without their consent and without any compensation is one of the biggest issues here. It's not that AI music shouldn't exist. It's that it's being built on the work of people who never agreed to be part of it and aren't seeing a cent in return. Until we fix that, it’s hard to call any of this real progress," says Ferguson.

  • Payday incoming: For Ferguson, the issue isn't just theoretical. "I discovered that some of my own books were on a list of works used to train large language models. So from one of these lawsuits, I might get, I don't know, three dollars someday," he remarks. It's a reality that showcases the absurd scale of the problem for individual creators.

  • Put a label on it: While the fight for compensation plays out in court, Ferguson points to a more immediate problem: a lack of transparency on streaming platforms. "I could see Spotify listing the band name and adding 'AI' after it," he suggests. "They already tag songs as 'recommended,' so they could do the same here and let listeners decide for themselves."

  • AI detection kit: Outside of explicit AI labels, Ferguson advises listeners to watch for red flags. "The easy thing is to look for the band's page. If they're touring, they probably exist. If there's not much information, no humans are mentioned, and they've released an impossible number of songs, like 73 tracks in one month, they're probably AI."

    Chris Ferguson - Professor of Psychology | Stetson University
    AI music is like taxes and death. You can't stop it. All you can do is nudge the system so it's more transparent and fair to the human artist. That way, if it's transparent and you don't want to partake, you don't have to. And if other people want to listen to it, that's their business.Chris Ferguson - Professor of Psychology | Stetson University

    Ferguson doesn’t see AI as a revolution, but as the next logical step in a long history of musical technology that includes now-commonplace tools like MIDI, sampling, and Auto-Tune. He points to current tours like that of Emerson, Lake & Palmer—where two of the three members are deceased and appear via archival video—as evidence that the line between live and pre-recorded is already blurry. The observation leads to his core theory of a future featuring "parallel tracks," where human and AI artists offer different kinds of value, a sentiment echoed by industry-watchers who see human oversight as key.

  • The allure of Darkness: He used Ozzy Osbourne as an example of an artist whose "Prince of Darkness" persona was a core part of his appeal, contending that authentic storytelling will remain the most important element. "I love his music," he says, "but I think it was the mystique around his persona that really drew people to him."

  • A parasocial pal: Ferguson notes that some AI bands are marketed on their accessibility. "With some AI artists, you can talk to the band members on chatbots and even develop a kind of parasocial relationship with them. Some people might like that."

Since the technology is unstoppable, Ferguson suggests our energy should be focused on nudging the system toward fairness and transparency, and then trusting people to choose for themselves. Some companies are already embracing this approach, building artist-first AI tools and pioneering models for fair remuneration.

"AI music is like taxes and death. You can't stop it. All you can do is nudge the system so it's more transparent and fair to the human artist. That way, if it's transparent and you don't want to partake, you don't have to. And if other people want to listen to it, that's their business," Ferguson concludes.