Tik Tok and Universal Music Group’s Licensing Battle

A month-long standoff between Universal Music Group (“UMG”) and TikTok persists after combative licensing negotiations have continuously failed. This stalemate led to the removal of UMG’s music from the platform on February 1, 2024, silencing thousands of videos featuring UMG’s music and, in turn, drastically reducing content creators’ music options for new clips.¹ The effects of the broken partnership have materialized, but the extent of the fallout is unclear, as some videos using UMG recordings appeared to be unaffected, while others, such as those featuring tracks by UMG artists Taylor Swift and Drake, have been silenced, accompanied by the statement “This sound isn’t available” or “Sound removed due to copyright restrictions.”²

UMG, one of the world’s largest music labels, publicly revealed the ongoing contract disputes over the short-form video platform’s access to the music label’s extensive catalog after their licensing deal expired, leading to a full contract termination.³ On January 30, 2024, the day preceding the expiration of UMG’s contract with TikTok, UMG published an open letter explaining to its artists and songwriters that all of their music would be removed from TikTok’s platform due to TikTok’s failure to: (1) appropriately compensate UMG’s artists and songwriters; (2) adequately protect human artists from artificial intelligence’s (“AI”) harmful effects; and (3) adequately address online safety issues for TikTok’s users.⁴

With respect to the issue of artist and songwriter compensation, UMG claims that TikTok proposed paying its artists and songwriters “at a rate that is a fraction of the rate that similarly situated major social platforms pay” while also “allowing the platform to be flooded with AI-generated recordings,” content that “massively dilute[s] the royalty pool for human artists.”⁵ In large part, UMG’s letter was concerned with the influx of AI-generated recordings on the platform, and accused TikTok of “sponsoring artist replacement by AI” by not only allowing, but also encouraging AI music creation on the platform itself.⁶ Further, the letter alleges TikTok developed tools to “enable, promote and encourage AI music creation on the platform itself,” claiming UMG’s only available means to seek the removal of the infringing content on TikTok was a “monumentally cumbersome and ineffective process which equates to the digital equivalent of Whac-a-Mole.”⁷ Essentially, UMG argues TikTok’s adoption of AI-generated music decreases the platform users’ utilization of UMG’s music catalog, thereby decreasing UMG’s social media revenue, as well as that of its songwriters’ and recording artists’.⁸

UMG’s letter further alleged that in response to its refusal to accept a deal “worth less than the previous deal, far less than fair market value and not reflective of their exponential growth,” TikTok attempted to “bully” and “intimidate” UMG into accepting the deal by selectively removing the music of certain developing UMG artists from the platform subjecting them to under-exposure, while keeping audience-driving global stars’ music on its platform.⁹ Just a few hours later on the same day, TikTok issued a fiery response, calling the accusatory letter a “false narrative” and attacking UMG for having “put their own greed above the interests of its artists and songwriters.”¹⁰

UMG’s withdrawal from one of the world’s most influential online outlets, and, in turn, a vital promotional arena for the music industry, has been interpreted as a near declaration of war against TikTok, despite Universal’s limited control over it.¹¹ These negotiations have brought attention to not only the value of promotion, but also to the threat AI poses to the music industry’s artists and songwriters.¹²

The implications of the standoff for artists, labels, and platforms alike primarily concern social media platforms’ implementation of internal and operational AI guardrails to ensure royalties are undiluted.¹³ TikTok’s inconsistent AI management, in addition to its development of AI-content-generating tools, demonstrates the risks of integrating AI content without proper mechanisms for identification and removal of such content.¹⁴ UMG’s public acknowledgement and ridicule of TikTok’s acquiescence to AI’s dilution of its artists’ creativity may be an attempt to set a precedent as to how platforms treat AI-generated content since the withdrawal of its content could be followed with legal action.¹⁵ As a matter of law, if UMG owns the publishing rights to a song—the words and composition—and subsequently serves TikTok with notice requiring the removal of infringing content of such from the platform, users could be barred from posting covers of UMG’s artists’ tracks.¹⁶

The legal concerns instilled in all parties due to the competitive threat AI-generated content introduces are “impressive” but arguably “scary,” as even UMG artist Billie Eilish has expressed her concerns regarding AI’s potential to saturate the music streaming industry, negatively impacting human creativity.¹⁷

Sara Casey is a second-year law student at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law and a Staff Editor at the Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal. Sara is interested in music and entertainment law, as she comes from a background in the entertainment industry. Sara currently works for Madison Square Garden’s Box Office and, before coming to law school, oversaw operations at the University of Florida’s multi-purpose arena’s Box Office.