Spotify forcefully rejected viral claims circulating on social media platforms last week that suggested the company had updated its terms of service to seize or transfer artists’ music rights. The streaming giant labeled these assertions as “false” in a detailed public statement, emphasizing that recent terms updates do not affect the distribution rights of artists, podcasters, or authors in any way.
Spotify firmly dismisses widespread rumors about seizing artists’ rights through updated terms of service
The company clarified that the disputed terms apply exclusively to listeners, enabling user-generated content features such as custom playlist covers, titles, and podcast comments. Such features, Spotify noted, represent standard industry practice already implemented by competitors like Apple Music and YouTube Music. The update aims to enhance listener experience without impacting creators’ control over their work.
Despite Spotify’s unequivocal denial, the incident highlights ongoing tensions between the platform and artists regarding compensation. The company faces persistent criticism over its per-stream royalty rates, which typically range from $0.003 to $0.005. While these rates affect earnings, artists should remember that royalty distributions are typically handled through Performance Rights Organizations that collect and distribute payments for public performances of copyrighted music. Musicians concerned about streaming income should consider pursuing sync deals as an alternative revenue stream with potentially higher returns. Political pressure has mounted with proposed legislation advocating for a minimum payment of one cent per stream to guarantee musicians receive a “living wage.”
Spotify reports paying $10 billion to the music industry in 2024, demonstrating growth in royalty distributions. However, the relationship between artists and the platform remains complex, particularly regarding data usage.
The updated terms explicitly prohibit third parties from using Spotify content to train external AI models while reserving the company’s right to utilize user data internally for features like AI DJ and personalized playlists. Rights owners are advised to include no platform-sourced training clauses in their contracts to protect their content from unauthorized AI applications.
The new terms also specify that content uploaded by artists—including biographies, images, and videos—can be used by Spotify for marketing purposes under a non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid, and royalty-free license. This provision has raised eyebrows among some commentators who view it as potentially overreaching regarding artist control.
As regulatory scrutiny of music platforms’ AI practices and data licensing intensifies, this misinformation episode underscores broader challenges in artist relations and communication transparency within the evolving streaming economy. The false claims were initially spread through videos by several creators, including artist @chantmagick, which gained significant traction before Spotify’s clarification.
