While most debates about AI in music fixate on whether machines can outwrite musicians, the more consequential story is unfolding in the world of compensation. The next era of artist pay will be shaped not by the newest model release but by judges, court filings, and the legal precedents that decide who gets what. The future of creative work is heading into a moment where old law, not new tech, sets the rhythm.
We spoke with Roland Kluger, a music industry veteran with over 50 years of experience as a publisher, producer, and rights broker. Having represented iconic acts including ABBA, The Beatles, and Bob Dylan, his perspective is forged by decades of navigating disruption. As the former President of the Music Publisher Association in Brussels and current CEO of the music rights and strategic acquisition consultancy KP Kluger Partners & RKM, his perspective reframes the industry's core conflict: it isn't human versus machine, but the creator versus the platform. His view is rooted in the belief that platforms will not voluntarily create fair compensation models and will only do so when required by legal or regulatory pressure.
"The people running AI will have to pay for it, but figuring out the how and the what will take many years. That has always been the case with music and copyrights. It’s a long process where a couple of major lawsuits will set the precedent," says Kluger. "To me, it's very much like what happened with sampling."
- Human in the loophole: Kluger views the fundamental requirement of human authorship to secure copyright protection as a key source of leverage for artists, meaning their involvement remains a requirement for anyone looking to own and monetize a creative work. "AI-generated content is not protected by copyright today because it isn't made by a human being. For a work to be protected, a human must be part of the creative process."
In Kluger's analysis, AI will likely split the market. He predicts it will become a dominant tool for functional, utilitarian music, while human artists will remain central to creating cultural "phenomena."
-
Alive in concert: "You might get hits from AI and plenty of easy-listening music, but the big cultural moments will stay human because true success needs more than a track. It needs a band, live performance, and a full brand that fans can follow. Taylor Swift is the extreme example, but she shows what a modern artist can build when the music is only one part of the story."
-
Lights, camera, music: Record labels, in his view, are drifting toward a movie studio model where some artists no longer need them while major acts rely on their full force. "They'll become irrelevant for certain artists, and then they'll be very relevant for the majors." The business already mirrors Hollywood, Kluger notes, pointing to the surge of concert films as proof. "The music business follows the movie business very closely," a trend made unmistakable by the runaway success of Taylor Swift's Eras Tour on the big screen.
Kluger points to a stubborn paradox. The royalty pie keeps growing, yet the way it gets divided still fails the people who make the music. Even owning your work is only half the battle when the real challenge is being heard in a landscape crowded with millions of new and often spammy tracks. In his view, breaking through still comes down to two old-school paths: building a following through constant gigging or powering upward with a serious marketing budget.
-
Same but different: "The problem today is that there's so much volume. Either you build yourself through doing gigs, or it comes down to money. It comes down to your marketing budget," Kluger explains. "You're back to having a good agent, a publicist, a lawyer, and so on. It's a different story, but it's still the same."
Kluger’s advice to build a power base is rooted in his pragmatic analysis of platform economics. He suggests creators should not expect platforms to seek a fair "balance," but instead prepare for them to use familiar tactics to devalue creative work.
- Force, not friendship: "The platforms don't care. Their goal is to pay the least money. So it's a question of how you're going to squeeze them. They will only do it if they are forced." That skepticism persists despite platform announcements of new AI protections, which many see as reactive measures against a growing tide of AI slop.
Kluger leaves the conversation with a reminder that the next chapter of music and AI will not be written by technology alone. It will hinge on leverage. Artists who build their own momentum will have choices, while those who rely on platforms to act in their interest risk losing control of both their work and their worth. In his view, power is the only real negotiating tool the creative side has ever had.
"It's a question of power. What do you have in hand? What do the platforms need from you? Do you need them? God forbid that you need them as a creator," he concludes.