SoundCloud Quietly Updated Their Terms to Let AI Feast on Artists' Music

SoundCloud — a music sharing platform once so beloved by artists it spawned sub-genres named after it — updated its terms of service (TOS), forcing artists who use SoundCloud to let their music train AI.

[UPDATE: SoundCloud has provided Futurism with a statement, which we've appended in full at the end of this story.]

It looks like the change went into effect during SoundCloud's last TOS policy update in February 2024, and it's just coming to light now.

The updated terms read that "in the absence of a separate agreement that states otherwise," creators who upload content to the site "explicitly agree that your Content may be used to inform, train, develop or serve as input to artificial intelligence or machine intelligence technologies or services as part of and for providing the services."

In short, the language in the update suggests that musicians, artists, and other creators who use SoundCloud for distribution can expect their uploaded work to be funneled into AI models as training data.

It's a sweeping provision. And how SoundCloud is actually applying it isn't exactly clear. But since early 2024, SoundCloud has integrated several generative AI tools and services into its platform that largely center on creating or producing new music.

These changes started in late January 2024 (just before the TOS update), with the integration of three "assistive AI" products designed to help SoundCloud's creators. According to a press release, these tools are designed to "allow artists to upload songs created with assistive AI tools directly to SoundCloud."

In November of that year, following the TOS update, SoundCloud introduced several more "assistive" AI integrations. These tools are similarly targeted at music generation and production tasks, and in a press release, SoundCloud lauded them as a way to "democratize music creation for all artists."

Those services include products like Tuney, which "enables remixing, editing, and new track generation"; AIBeatz, a synthetic beat maker that allows users to "generate and customize [their] own beats like a Pro"; and Starmony, which SoundCloud says can help publishers "quickly produce high-quality tracks" and "distribute them across multiple platforms" while retaining a "large share of royalties," among others.

During the November round of AI integrations, SoundCloud said in a press release it would double down on treating musicians better, per their "commitment to responsible, innovative and ethical use of creative AI tools" by partnering with services designed to "provide all of our existing and new AI partners access to content identification solutions," which SoundCloud said would ensure "rights holders receive proper credit and compensation."

The company also entered into AI for Music's non-binding "Principles for Music Creation with AI" pledge, which, according to the AI for Music website, marks a commitment to the "vital contributions of human creativity and to the responsible development and application of artificial intelligence for music creation."

Pledges withstanding, not all SoundCloud users appeared to be aware of the AI training update.

We caught the wind of the update earlier today after The Flight, a musical duo who have composed music for popular films and videogames, posted about the terms change on Bluesky.

"Ok then..." read the post, which linked to SoundCloud's terms webpage, "deleted all our songs that we uploaded to Soundcloud and now closing account."

"YIKES," read a following Bluesky post from the composer Adam Humphreys, "@soundcloud.dev no thank you."

"SoundCloud seems to claim the right to train on people's uploaded music in their terms," Ed Newton-Rex, a composer and the CEO of the nonprofit Fairly Trained, said on X-formerly-Twitter. "I think they have major questions to answer over this."

We reached out to SoundCloud to ask about the update and what it means for artists' work. They've since responded with a statement we've run in full at the bottom of this story.

In their statement, SoundCloud claims to have never used artist content to train AI models, and that they don't develop AI tools or allow third parties to train AI using SoundCloud content. Furthermore, that the February 2024 TOS update was instituted to "clarify" the interactions between AI technologies within SoundCloud's platform and SoundCloud content. The examples of this they provided include playlist generation, music recommendations, and fraud detection.

In response to a follow-up, SoundCloud also emphasized exemptions for licensed content “such as music from major labels” and promised to introduce clear opt-outs “in advance” should they consider training generative AI with artists’ work.

SoundCloud emerged in the late 2000s as an industry-shifting digital platform that allowed artists — especially emerging and independent artists — to upload and distribute their work at a remarkably low cost without relying on record labels and other guarded industry gatekeepers. This dynamic has also historically made SoundCloud an incredible venue for music discovery, and altogether, its place as an accessible online stage for emerging acts has cemented it as an important mainstay in the music industry landscape.

But like countless other digital platforms in the AI era, SoundCloud seems to understand that the vast piles of data it's collected over its many years of operation are more valuable than ever. And as tensions between musicians, among other creative professionals, and the digital companies that platform them continue to rise over the practical and ethical implications of AI, pushback from users who didn't expect to see their creative work quietly vacuumed into AI models is anything but unexpected.

More on AI and music: CEO of Song-Generating AI App Says People "Don't Enjoy" Making Music With Instruments