‘I feel like I’m at war’: are we losing the battle against machine-made music?
Fenix Flexin’s charting single Rubberz became a focal point in the debate over AI-made music after the rapper initially denied, then later acknowledged, using artificial intelligence in its creation. The dispute illustrates how machine-generated tracks can reach mainstream audiences while remaining difficult to identify, raising concerns about authenticity, consent and the future role of human musicians.
Released in June, Rubberz reached No 58 on the Billboard Hot 100 and exceeded 35 million Spotify streams, despite its markedly different synth-pop sound. Producer Medasin said he recreated similar music using the free tool Treblo, whose own classifier reportedly judged the track “very likely” to have been generated with it; Fenix later said AI was not involved in the recording process. On 29 July, Universal, Sony and Warner joined other labels in proposing that charts exclude AI tracks unless they are authorised, lawful, substantially human-made and free from manipulation concerns.
- AI-assisted Rubberz reached Billboard’s Hot 100.
- Fenix Flexin eventually acknowledged using AI.
- Major labels seek stricter chart rules for AI music.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Critics argue that the rapid spread of AI-generated music threatens the livelihoods, consent and cultural contribution of human musicians, particularly when systems are trained on artists’ work without clear permission or payment. They contend that cheap, high-volume synthetic tracks can swamp streaming platforms and charts, making it harder for original artists to be discovered and rewarding labels or technology firms over creators. On this view, stronger licensing rules, labelling and platform safeguards are needed to preserve trust and a viable human music ecosystem.
The case against
Supporters argue that AI is a creative tool rather than an automatic replacement for musicians, capable of lowering barriers for independent artists, writers and small labels that lack expensive production resources. They maintain that audiences still value distinctive human stories, live performance and artistic judgement, while technology has long changed how music is made without ending musical creativity. From this perspective, the priority is to develop fair attribution and compensation systems that allow experimentation and new forms of collaboration rather than treating all machine-assisted music as inherently harmful.