AI Music Creator Signs With Label as Synthetic Songs Stir Industry Debate

LONDON — A British creator who uses generative artificial intelligence to produce music has signed with an independent record label after one of his tracks drew millions of streams, a development that has reignited debate about the future of the music industry.

Oliver McCann, 37, who performs under the name imoliver, said he has no traditional musical training and relies on chatbot-style tools to compose songs spanning indie-pop, electro-soul and country-rap. McCann, a former visual designer, said he began experimenting with AI to "bring some of my lyrics to life." Last month he signed with Hallwood Media after a track credited to him received about 3 million streams, a deal that has been described as among the first times a music label has inked a contract with an AI music creator.

McCann is part of a growing wave of synthetic music fueled by tools that generate melody, instrumentation and lyrics from user prompts. Platforms such as Suno and Udio are among the technologies cited by industry observers as enabling rapid production of songs without traditional musical training. The phenomenon has been amplified by viral projects, including Velvet Sundown, a purported band whose songs, lyrics and album art were entirely created by AI and drew widespread attention online.

The rise of AI-generated music has prompted a range of reactions across the industry. Supporters and creators say generative tools democratize music-making by lowering technical barriers, enabling people without conventional musical skills to realize creative ideas. McCann and others frame their work as using AI as a collaborator that can translate concepts and lyrics into finished tracks.

At the same time, musicians, songwriters and some industry stakeholders have raised concerns about authorship, copyright and economic impacts. Legal and policy questions persist over who owns AI-generated works, whether training data infringing on existing recordings has been used, and how royalties and credits should be allocated when human input is limited or indirect. These issues have prompted calls for clearer rules from rights holders, creators' groups and some policymakers.

Record labels and streaming platforms have begun to grapple with the implications. Some labels are exploring ways to incorporate AI-created content into their rosters and revenue models, while others are more cautious. Streaming services have enacted or are considering policies governing synthetic content, disclosure and takedown processes, but practices vary and regulatory guidance remains uneven across jurisdictions.

Industry observers note that the technology is evolving rapidly. Advances in generative models can produce increasingly polished vocal performances and instrumental arrangements, blurring traditional distinctions between human and machine authorship. That evolution has intensified debates about cultural authenticity, the value of human musicianship and how to ensure fair compensation and recognition for creators whose work may be reproduced or emulated by algorithms.

Legal experts say the coming years will likely see test cases and legislative attention that could shape how AI-generated music is treated under copyright law. Until then, artists, labels and platforms will continue experimenting with business models and disclosure practices while navigating unsettled legal terrain.

For creators like McCann, the technology offers an accessible route to an audience. For established musicians and rights holders, it raises questions about protecting creative labor and the role of human artistry in an era of synthetic production. The balance the industry strikes between those competing imperatives is expected to influence how music is made, distributed and monetized in the years ahead.