Technology news and discussion on TalkFuse.
Spotify says it doesn’t need deals with all the majors to launch its AI covers and remixes tool
Spotify has said it does not need licensing agreements with all three major record labels before launching its AI-powered covers and remixes tool, according to Co-CEO Gustav Söderström on the company's Q2 2026 earnings call. The comments came shortly after Spotify announced a licensing deal with Merlin, the body representing independent labels, adding to its existing agreement with Universal Music Group struck in May, while Warner Music Group and Sony Music have yet to sign on for the product.
Söderström compared the situation to Spotify's early years, when the platform launched without significant parts of the music catalogue and only later secured acts such as The Beatles and Metallica. He said the tool's next step is a public "research preview" allowing fans to create remixes and rate them, generating preference data used to refine the model through reinforcement learning. He pointed to Spotify's base of 777 million monthly active users, and noted the company also passed 300 million Premium subscribers in the quarter, as a key advantage over rival AI music developers.
In short
- Spotify says it can launch AI covers/remixes tool without all major labels
- Deal signed with Merlin; Warner and Sony not yet on board
- Public "research preview" planned to train the AI model
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Spotify's pragmatic approach reflects how transformative technologies actually develop in practice: comprehensive agreements with the largest rights holders and independent labels provide sufficient foundation to launch, gather user preference data, and refine the product iteratively. The company's enormous user base and proven track record give it negotiating leverage to bring reluctant parties into the fold, whilst waiting for universal consent risks years of deadlock that serves no one. The historical precedent of streaming itself—where Spotify launched without complete catalogues and secured holdouts once market value was demonstrated—suggests this incremental approach ultimately works better than demanding perfection before market entry.
The case against
Generative AI that creates derivative works in artists' styles raises fundamentally different ethical and contractual issues than streaming distribution, making the comparison to Spotify's early years misleading. Artists and labels have legitimate interests in controlling how their creative work trains AI systems and shapes generative outputs, and proceeding without their explicit consent denies them meaningful input on technology that affects their livelihoods. Responsible development of transformative technology requires comprehensive partnership and licensing before launch, not after, to ensure creative voices help shape how these tools evolve rather than being presented with fait accompli.
Explained simply
Spotify is a music streaming service that offers songs under agreements with the people and companies that own the rights. The three largest record companies are Universal Music Group, Sony Music and Warner Music Group; Merlin represents many independent labels in licensing discussions.
AI covers and remixes are new versions of existing music made with artificial intelligence. Making and sharing them can involve rights to both recordings and songs, so agreements help determine what a tool can use and how artists and rights holders are paid.
Spotify has previously launched with an incomplete catalogue and added music later. Its large audience could give it many listeners to try a new tool, while also making questions about permissions and the role of artists significant to its development.
AI Entertainment Music Technology