IFPI introduces AI rules for international music charts

← Back to the feed

IFPI introduces AI rules for international music charts

Developed over time first seen 2 months ago

Billboard · 2 months ago

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry has adopted new principles for identifying and assessing generative AI music on international charts. The policy supports clearer labelling of AI use while seeking to ensure charts continue to recognise primarily human-created work and exclude music that may exploit artists or manipulate streaming.

To qualify, AI-assisted tracks must use authorised tools, comply with copyright, related and personality rights, disclose their AI use, and remain primarily created by humans. The rules apply to IFPI-managed charts across the Middle East and North Africa, South-East Asia, South Africa and Latin America; the body will also work with chart operators including South Korea’s Circle Chart, France’s SNEP and Australia’s ARIA.

  • IFPI introduces AI eligibility and labelling rules for global music charts.
  • AI-assisted tracks must be authorised, disclosed and primarily human-created.
  • Rules cover IFPI charts across several international regions.

New here? Start with this

The IFPI is the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, which represents the recorded-music business worldwide. It works with national music groups and helps oversee some charts that rank popular songs and albums in different regions.

Generative AI can create music, vocals or lyrics from instructions, raising questions about who made a song and whether it uses a performer’s work or identity without permission. Music charts matter to artists, record labels and listeners because a high position can bring attention, sales and streaming income.

The new approach distinguishes between music that uses authorised AI tools as part of human creative work and tracks made largely by AI or using material without permission. It also reflects wider efforts in the music industry to set rules around copyright, disclosure and the protection of performers’ voices and likenesses.

Both sides, in good faith

The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.

The case for

Supporters argue that clear eligibility rules protect the integrity and credibility of music charts at a moment when generative AI can imitate artists, obscure authorship and scale production rapidly. Requiring authorisation, rights compliance and disclosure can help ensure that chart success continues to reflect identifiable human creative work, while still permitting responsible AI assistance. They see this as a proportionate safeguard for artists’ livelihoods, consent and public trust.

The case against

Critics argue that requiring tracks to be primarily human-created and subject to special disclosure may draw an uncertain line between legitimate tools and emerging forms of artistic expression. Music has long incorporated new production technologies, and overly restrictive or inconsistently applied rules could disadvantage independent creators and regions with fewer resources to document complex workflows. They favour protections against infringement and deception, but contend that charts should judge released music chiefly by audience engagement rather than by prescribing how much AI involvement is acceptable.

More coverage

AI Art Asia Cricket Culture Entertainment Music Sport Technology World

Read the full article at the source →

Originally published by Billboard as “IFPI Backs Call for AI Music Labeling, Implements Immediate Change on Number of Key International Charts”.