New AI Song Creation Rule
The largest music team in South Korea has introduced a new rule requiring creators to guarantee that AI was not used to write songs when registering these compositions with the organization.
“Currently, there are no clear legal standards or management plans for music using AI, so the association holds registration when it is reported about musical music,” – Korean Musical Association of Copyright (Lump) stated in a press release published on their website last month.
Starting from March 24, anyone wishing to register a song with the collective management organization must indicate flags ensuring that AI was not involved in their creation.
If AI was used during the songwriting process, but the registration claims otherwise, and Lump identifies this discrepancy, the organization may withhold royalties or even remove the work from its system.
“You must agree to confirm and guarantee that the work you report did not involve AI and was created solely through human creative contributions,” Komca said.
Legal Responsibilities and Consequences
Creators will also have to agree to “take legal responsibility for all civil and criminal disputes arising from false reports,” stating that if it is discovered that AI was utilized in creating a song, “actions such as withholding payment or revoking copyrights may be taken in accordance with the association’s policy.”
This non-profit organization serves 30,000 songwriters, composers, and music publishers, managing a catalog of over 3.7 million works, including renowned Korean artists such as Psy, BTS, Super Junior, and EXO.
It is noteworthy that CMO administers copyrights, not recordings, so its policy does not apply to recorded music. Some South Korean K-Pop companies have employed AI in their recordings; for instance, Hybe released music with vocal lines translated into various AI-generated languages.
Komca affirmed that its policy mandates “0%” contribution of AI to the creation of a song, according to a report in Korea Bulletin.
Implications for the Future
Expressing its policy, Komca noted that this regulation may evolve in the future. The new policy is a “management measure” established in a time when “legal standards for artificial intelligence music were not defined.”
The Association also remarked that “due to recent advancements in artificial intelligence technologies, the volume of music production utilizing AI is growing rapidly.”
Lump’s policy is stricter than South Korea’s general policy on AI’s use in copyright. In 2023, the Korea Copyright Commission and the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism announced that while entirely AI-generated works cannot be protected by copyright, portions of works created with AI assistance may still qualify for copyright protection if a human component is present.
“Due to recent advancements in artificial intelligence technology, the volume of music production using artificial intelligence is rapidly increasing.”
Korean Musical Association of Copyright
This decision comes at a time when lawmakers and courts worldwide grapple with the issue of copyright for works generated by AI. Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s 2023 ruling stating that works created entirely by AI cannot be copyrighted.
Computer scientist Dr. Stephen Thaler, who developed a generative AI technology called Creative Machine, sought copyright registration from the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) for artworks produced by his AI. Thaler pursued legal action after the Copyright Office rejected his application based on requirements for human authorship.
“A Creative Machine cannot be recognized as the author of protected copyright, as the 1976 copyright law mandates that all work must primarily be authored by a human,” the appeals court stated last month.
Nevertheless, USCO’s policy applies exclusively to works created wholly by AI. In a recent report, the copyright office indicated that works made with the assistance of AI could be eligible for copyright if they contain a “sufficient” quantity of human expression.
“The use of artificial intelligence tools to aid, rather than replace, human creativity does not affect the availability of copyright protection for the outcome,” the USCO report stated. “Where this creativity is expressed through AI systems, it continues to receive protection. However, extending protection to material where expressive elements are determined by the machine remains a point of discussion,” noted Shira Perlmutter, the copyright register and USCO Director.
South Korea’s largest music copyright collective just banned registration of songs created with AI
