IFPI and Australia’s ARIA set chart rules for music made with AI

In short: Music tracks can appear on official charts only if they are mainly created by people, even if AI tools were used.

What happened

IFPI, a global music industry group, has published new principles for songs and recordings made with generative AI. Generative AI is software that can produce new audio, lyrics, or voices from instructions, a bit like a machine that can “write and perform” on request.

Under IFPI’s approach, a recording can be eligible for official charts only if it is “substantially human made.” That means human creative input must be the primary driver of the work. Fully AI-generated recordings, where the system creates the track with no meaningful human creative control, are excluded.

IFPI also sets two other core tests. The AI service used must be properly authorised and lawful, and the recording must not raise concerns about stream or chart manipulation (for example, using fake plays to push a song up the rankings).

The principles also say recordings must follow relevant laws, including copyright and personality rights (rules about using someone’s name, image, or voice). They must follow the AI service’s terms, and in some cases may require disclosure of AI use to listeners on music platforms.

Australia’s chart provider ARIA has adopted this approach. ARIA says an AI-generated recording is not eligible for its charts. A human-made recording that used generative AI can still qualify if it meets the chart rules. ARIA does not set a fixed percentage for how much must be human, and plans to assess cases individually.

Why it matters

Music charts affect what people discover and what artists earn. These rules are meant to keep charts focused on human-led work, while still allowing AI as a tool, like a studio instrument, when a person remains in charge.

Source: NYTimes