Tidal stops paying royalties for AI music and starts labeling tracks

Tidal has announced a new AI music policy: tracks that the platform identifies as 100% artificially generated will lose monetization immediately, and starting July 15 will receive a special icon label for listeners.

Money for Humans Only

The core principle of the new policy is stated directly: royalties should go to authors who actually created, wrote, and performed the music. "Tidal is primarily interested in ensuring that royalties reach original works directly created, written, and performed by people. Therefore, we will not knowingly pay royalties for music that we identify as fully AI-generated," the company said in an official statement.

Monetization for fully AI-generated music is disabled effective immediately. There is no ban on uploading or listening to such tracks — they simply stop generating income for the account owners who uploaded them. This is not a blockade, but a financial disqualification.

The music industry has long been concerned that AI tracks clog streaming platforms and drain royalties from real authors. The volume of uploaded AI content has surged over the past two years — and pressure on streamers to take action has intensified significantly.

Labeling Starting July 15

In parallel, Tidal is introducing a labeling system for listeners. Starting July 15, tracks that the platform's algorithms recognize as entirely AI-generated will receive a special icon. This will allow users to decide for themselves whether they want to listen to such content — before hitting Play.

Key parameters of the new policy:

• Monetization of AI tracks is disabled effective today
• A visible badge will appear starting July 15
• Only tracks created 100% by AI fall under the restrictions
• Partially AI-generated tracks are not subject to restrictions
• The platform has not publicly disclosed its detection tools

The last point is critical: how exactly Tidal determines a "fully AI-generated track" remains an open question. Detection technologies are imperfect, and the boundary between "human with AI tools" and "pure AI" is a subject of industry debate.

Authors who use AI as one of the tools in their creative work are not subject to restrictions.

No Total Ban — And That's a Choice

Tidal's approach fundamentally differs from a possible ban: the platform is not removing AI music, but it's not willing to pay for it. This is a deliberate compromise between content accessibility and financial fairness.

On one hand — the interests of listeners who want access to any content. On the other — the interests of musicians who are concerned that automatically generated tracks dilute the royalty pool and reduce payments to living authors.

This is how the pro-rata streaming model works: the more plays any track gets, the less everyone else gets.

"Tidal is primarily interested in ensuring that royalties reach

original works directly created, written, and performed by people," — from the company's official statement.

The decision to strip AI music of monetization but not ban it is an attempt to strike a balance and not alienate the audience with strict restrictions, while simultaneously protecting the financial interests of professional musicians.

What This Means

Tidal is setting a model that could become an industry standard: AI content remains on the platform, but only human creativity is monetized. If this approach is adopted by Spotify, Apple Music, and YouTube Music, the scheme of "upload AI tracks in bulk and earn royalties" will effectively close.

For authors who use AI as a tool in their creative process, nothing changes for now — restrictions apply only to content created by AI without human involvement.