AI created music – copyright infringement or new creation?
(2025) HARN63 20251Department of Business Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Artificial Intelligence has existed for many years and keeps developing. AI has become better at generating new works, for example music, which raises a question of whether AI can potentially infringe on copyright. This thesis examines the legal framework regarding copyright and AI and whether AI used in music can constitute a copyright infringement. The question that is focused on is “To what extent is copyright law capable of achieving the objective of protecting the interests of music artists in the era of AI?
This was addressed by analysing how EU law handles copyright protected works when training AI, and how AI generated musical outputs are handled.
The thesis explains the difference between musical works protected by copyright,... (More) - Artificial Intelligence has existed for many years and keeps developing. AI has become better at generating new works, for example music, which raises a question of whether AI can potentially infringe on copyright. This thesis examines the legal framework regarding copyright and AI and whether AI used in music can constitute a copyright infringement. The question that is focused on is “To what extent is copyright law capable of achieving the objective of protecting the interests of music artists in the era of AI?
This was addressed by analysing how EU law handles copyright protected works when training AI, and how AI generated musical outputs are handled.
The thesis explains the difference between musical works protected by copyright, and phonograms and performances that are protected under neighbouring right, or related rights.
The InfoSoc Directive provides rightsholders exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduction and communication to the public, which aims to protect rightsholders and their work. AI generated music is often reproduced more than once when training AI. The InfoSoc Directive aims to harmonize copyright law in today’s digital environment, by introducing the exceptions and protect creators.
The thesis also examines the impact the DSM Directive has on the use of copyright protected content, focusing on music. Article 4 of the DSM Directive allows text and data mining when content has been lawfully accessed, as long as the rightsholder has not opted-out. The opt-out mechanism is an option for rightsholders if they do not wish for their work to be used for text and data mining activities. The DSM Directive attempts to modernize the law in the digital age, but the effectiveness of the opt-out mechanism is limited. It would be beneficial to update the legal framework to be able to ensure a balance between innovation and the creator’s rights.
The transparency obligation that is introduced in the AI Act can help the rightsholders strengthen their rights, as the transparency obligation obligates for companies to be transparent with how and if copyright protected works are used for AI. However, although progress has been made to copyright in the digital era, there are still uncertainties. The current legal framework is based on human creativity and authorship, which can make it complicated to apply when AI is involved. The legal framework should be updated to ensure better transparency, fair compensation and a better balance between human creativity and AI, as the use of AI in creative fields, like music, are growing. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9196943
- author
- Enochson, Cecilia LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- HARN63 20251
- year
- 2025
- type
- H1 - Master's Degree (One Year)
- subject
- keywords
- Music, AI, Copyright, Data, Rightsholder.
- language
- English
- id
- 9196943
- date added to LUP
- 2025-06-11 11:36:59
- date last changed
- 2025-06-11 11:36:59
@misc{9196943,
abstract = {{Artificial Intelligence has existed for many years and keeps developing. AI has become better at generating new works, for example music, which raises a question of whether AI can potentially infringe on copyright. This thesis examines the legal framework regarding copyright and AI and whether AI used in music can constitute a copyright infringement. The question that is focused on is “To what extent is copyright law capable of achieving the objective of protecting the interests of music artists in the era of AI?
This was addressed by analysing how EU law handles copyright protected works when training AI, and how AI generated musical outputs are handled.
The thesis explains the difference between musical works protected by copyright, and phonograms and performances that are protected under neighbouring right, or related rights.
The InfoSoc Directive provides rightsholders exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduction and communication to the public, which aims to protect rightsholders and their work. AI generated music is often reproduced more than once when training AI. The InfoSoc Directive aims to harmonize copyright law in today’s digital environment, by introducing the exceptions and protect creators.
The thesis also examines the impact the DSM Directive has on the use of copyright protected content, focusing on music. Article 4 of the DSM Directive allows text and data mining when content has been lawfully accessed, as long as the rightsholder has not opted-out. The opt-out mechanism is an option for rightsholders if they do not wish for their work to be used for text and data mining activities. The DSM Directive attempts to modernize the law in the digital age, but the effectiveness of the opt-out mechanism is limited. It would be beneficial to update the legal framework to be able to ensure a balance between innovation and the creator’s rights.
The transparency obligation that is introduced in the AI Act can help the rightsholders strengthen their rights, as the transparency obligation obligates for companies to be transparent with how and if copyright protected works are used for AI. However, although progress has been made to copyright in the digital era, there are still uncertainties. The current legal framework is based on human creativity and authorship, which can make it complicated to apply when AI is involved. The legal framework should be updated to ensure better transparency, fair compensation and a better balance between human creativity and AI, as the use of AI in creative fields, like music, are growing.}},
author = {{Enochson, Cecilia}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{AI created music – copyright infringement or new creation?}},
year = {{2025}},
}