A quiet clause buried in SoundCloud’s updated terms of use has sparked widespread concern among musicians and rights advocates, highlighting the increasingly murky intersection of user-generated content and artificial intelligence.

First flagged by Futurism, the clause—added in February 2024—permits SoundCloud to use user-uploaded content to “inform, train, develop, or serve as input to artificial intelligence or machine intelligence technologies.” The language, vague but far-reaching, appears to grant the company broad rights over music shared on its platform, unless a separate agreement states otherwise.

The revelation triggered immediate backlash across the artist community, already wary of how generative AI may be reshaping the future of music without clear consent or compensation.

SoundCloud Responds, Clarifies Stance

In response to the uproar, SoundCloud issued a statement distancing itself from any such usage. “SoundCloud has never used artist content to train AI models,” the company said. It also denied developing or enabling third-party AI tools to scrape user music from its platform for training purposes.

The statement detailed other AI applications the platform employs, including personalized recommendations, fraud detection, content identification, and technical safeguards against data scraping. However, notably absent was a direct commitment that music uploads wouldn’t be used for AI training in the future.

This ambiguity is at the heart of artists’ concerns. “Even if they say they’re not using it now, the door is open,” said one independent producer on X (formerly Twitter). “It’s about consent. We should be able to opt in, not be automatically included.”

Industry Tensions on the Rise

The SoundCloud controversy comes amid a wave of similar disputes in creative industries. Major AI developers like OpenAI, Stability AI, and Meta have been hit with lawsuits from authors, visual artists, and musicians alleging copyright infringement for training models on creative works without permission.

In music specifically, artists and labels have expressed growing anxiety about AI-generated vocals, deepfake tracks, and models trained on human-produced music to create synthetic compositions that mimic their style.

For platforms like SoundCloud, which hosts millions of tracks from independent and unsigned artists, the question of data rights becomes even more delicate.

While its recent products leverage AI for enhancing artist tools, SoundCloud has not developed generative music AI systems similar to those of Google’s MusicLM or Meta’s AudioCraft—at least not publicly.

Still, with its updated terms, critics argue the company is granting itself future permissions and that users weren’t adequately informed.

Legal experts warn that broad clauses like these may undermine artist rights, especially when users are unaware or don’t fully understand what they’re consenting to. In many cases, such terms are buried within lengthy service agreements.

What Happens Next?

While SoundCloud insists it has not and does not currently use artist content for AI training, the lack of a clear opt-out or opt-in mechanism leaves many creators uneasy. For now, the clause remains in the terms—meaning SoundCloud retains the legal right to use content for AI purposes in the future, unless users take steps to sign separate agreements.

With AI rapidly changing the creative landscape, artists are demanding more transparency and legal safeguards to protect their work from being quietly absorbed into machine learning datasets.

Here is the full statement released by SoundCloud:

SoundCloud has always been and will remain artist-first. Our focus is on empowering artists with control, clarity, and meaningful opportunities to grow. We believe AI, when developed responsibly, can expand creative potential—especially when guided by principles of consent, attribution, and fair compensation.

SoundCloud has never used artist content to train AI models, nor do we develop AI tools or allow third parties to scrape or use SoundCloud content from our platform for AI training purposes. In fact, we implemented technical safeguards, including a “no AI” tag on our site to explicitly prohibit unauthorized use.

The February 2024 update to our Terms of Service was intended to clarify how content may interact with AI technologies within SoundCloud’s own platform. Use cases include personalized recommendations, content organization, fraud detection, and improvements to content identification with the help of AI Technologies.

Any future application of AI at SoundCloud will be designed to support human artists, enhancing the tools, capabilities, reach and opportunities available to them on our platform. Examples include improving music recommendations, generating playlists, organizing content, and detecting fraudulent activity. These efforts are aligned with existing licensing agreements and ethical standards. Tools like Musiio are strictly used to power artist discovery and content organization, not to train generative AI models.

We understand the concerns raised and remain committed to open dialogue. Artists will continue to have control over their work, and we’ll keep our community informed every step of the way as we explore innovation and apply AI technologies responsibly, especially as legal and commercial frameworks continue to evolve.