Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Artificial intelligence is changing how music is written, recorded, distributed and monetized. It can help a songwriter edit a vocal or organize a catalog, but it can also reproduce protected recordings, imitate a recognizable voice, generate fraudulent releases and flood streaming services with music that competes for limited royalty pools.
In a TechBullion interview, Daniel Abowd—Royalty Network’s president and general counsel—argues for using AI where it supports human creators while protecting permission, attribution and compensation. His comments are best understood as an industry-insider perspective, not settled law. Since the interview, the U.S. Copyright Office has issued major work on digital replicas and AI-generated outputs, while training-data disputes remain fact-specific and contested.
Who is Daniel Abowd?
Royalty Network identifies Daniel Abowd as its president and general counsel. The company describes him as a lifelong musician and songwriter, practicing attorney and trained litigator whose work includes copyright, trademark, trade-secret and other intellectual-property matters. He also advises on client-rights protection and participates in company operations. Royalty Network’s team page supports that description.
That combination matters. Abowd is discussing AI from the overlapping perspectives of a creator, a rights lawyer and a publishing administrator. His statements therefore illuminate practical risks for songwriters, but they do not constitute legal advice or a consensus position for the music industry.
Recommended Free Tools
#1 Best Overall
Abowd’s framework: use assistance, resist substitution
Abowd does not describe every use of AI as harmful. In the interview, he supports tools that assist a human process—for example, editing, mastering or producing an initial building block that a songwriter substantially reshapes. He also sees potential for automation to improve catalog search, rights matching and royalty administration. His TechBullion interview presents those views directly.
Assistive AI
The human creator remains responsible for meaningful choices in lyrics, melody, arrangement, performance, production or editing. The more those choices determine the expressive result, the stronger the practical case for documenting human authorship.
Generative substitution
A system that produces most of the expressive content raises harder questions about authorship, registration, ownership and commercial exploitation. “AI-made” is not a single legal category; the facts include what the system generated, what a person selected or transformed, and what material was supplied to it.
Administrative AI
Less visible automation can be economically significant. Matching recordings to compositions, cleaning metadata, detecting unauthorized uses and processing statements may determine whether an existing work is identified and paid correctly.
Rank #2
The risks Abowd highlights
Abowd points to unlicensed copying for training, fraudulent releases, unauthorized use of a person’s name or likeness, voice imitation and the possibility that large volumes of inexpensive AI music could dilute human creators’ income. Those are concerns, not universal legal conclusions.
The legal analysis of training depends on facts such as the source of the material, purpose of copying, market effects, licenses and jurisdiction. Stakeholders have taken sharply different positions on those questions in the Copyright Office’s music and sound-recordings listening session. The session transcript records that disagreement.
What “people-first” means in practice
Royalty Network presents its model around long-term relationships, songwriter education, empathy, fairness and helping clients understand the value of their work. The company also describes functions covering administration, copyright and new media, distribution, creative work, catalog maintenance, licensing and client correspondence. Its team page documents that organizational structure.
The phrase is a philosophy, not independent evidence of service quality or financial performance. A creator evaluating any publisher or administrator should test it through concrete questions:
- Are statements, deductions and ownership shares explained clearly?
- Who corrects disputed metadata, and how are unmatched works pursued?
- What rights, territory, term, fees, commissions, audit rights and termination provisions appear in the contract?
- How are AI-assisted works handled, and what disclosures are required?
- Does the company help register works with the relevant collection systems?
What has changed in U.S. AI policy?
The Copyright Office launched its AI initiative in 2023 and received more than 10,000 comments on its notice of inquiry. Its published timeline lists Part 1 on digital replicas on July 31, 2024; Part 2 on the copyrightability of generative-AI outputs on January 29, 2025; and a prepublication Part 3 on generative-AI training released May 9, 2025. The Copyright Office’s AI hub contains the reports, registration guidance and related materials.
These tracks should not be collapsed. A digital replica concerns identity and likeness; output copyrightability concerns human authorship; training concerns copying and potential market effects. Contractual licenses may resolve some disputes even where litigation or policy remains unsettled. As of August 18, 2026, creators should consult the Office’s current materials and applicable law before relying on any general statement about training or AI-generated music.
Keep the rights separate
U.S. copyright law protects original works of authorship, including musical works and sound recordings. The Copyright Office’s copyright FAQ explains the general principle. In music, however, several assets and interests coexist:
- Musical composition: lyrics, melody, harmony and related authorship.
- Sound recording: a particular recorded performance and production.
- Identity interests: name, voice, image, likeness or persona, which may involve publicity, trademark or other law.
- Contract rights: publishing, work-for-hire, licensing and platform agreements.
- Metadata: ownership and identifier information essential to payment, but not a substitute for copyright ownership.
An AI output is not automatically protected or automatically free of rights issues. Protection depends on the extent and nature of human authorship and the applicable registration guidance.
How the Music Modernization Act fits
The Music Modernization Act has three titles: the Musical Works Modernization Act, the Classics Protection and Access Act, and the Allocation for Music Producers Act. The Copyright Office’s MMA overview describes the framework.
Title I created a blanket licensing system for certain digital uses of musical compositions and designated The Mechanical Licensing Collective (The MLC) to collect and distribute eligible mechanical royalties. The license availability date was January 1, 2021. Songwriters and publishers must claim works and ownership shares through The MLC’s system to receive applicable royalties.
Copyright Office registration and The MLC registration are different actions. The MLC does not replace a performing-rights organization, distributor, label, sound-recording collection service, publisher or administrator. Its FAQ explains matching, ownership claims, databases and unmatched works. Read the Music Modernization FAQ.
The royalty infrastructure creators must map
| Income or right | Underlying asset | Typical collection route | Main risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanical royalty | Composition | The MLC, publisher, administrator or direct license | Unmatched works or incorrect splits |
| Public-performance royalty | Composition | PRO or publisher/administrator | Missing registrations or affiliations |
| Digital performance royalty | Sound recording | SoundExchange or an applicable direct arrangement | Incorrect recording metadata |
| Streaming master income | Sound recording | Label, distributor or direct platform arrangement | Contract and platform-reporting terms |
| Synchronization income | Composition and/or master | Direct license, publisher, label or administrator | Failure to clear both sides |
| YouTube and new-media income | Composition and/or recording | Platform systems, administrator or distributor | Claims, conflicts and bad metadata |
Territory, ownership, contracts and the type of use determine the actual route. No single registration or company collects every category.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Best Value
A practical checklist for AI-assisted releases
- Preserve evidence of human work. Keep drafts, lyric files, project files, stems, prompts, edits, dates and collaborator details.
- Read the tool’s terms. Check commercial-use rights, output ownership, training permissions, indemnities, retention and restrictions on voice or style imitation.
- Protect confidential material. Do not upload unreleased or third-party recordings unless the platform’s retention and training terms are acceptable and you have the necessary permission.
- Obtain permission for recognizable identity. Avoid unauthorized voice or likeness imitation and document written consent where it is involved.
- Document splits. Identify every human contributor and confirm ownership in writing.
- Follow disclosure rules. Tell a distributor, publisher, platform or collective when its contract or policy requires AI disclosure.
- Register accurately. Claim the human-authored elements without presenting wholly machine-generated expression as human authorship.
- Use the right collection systems. Claim eligible mechanical shares with The MLC and complete separate registrations required for performances, recordings and other income.
- Review statements and usage. Investigate missing works, duplicate registrations, incorrect identifiers and unexplained deductions promptly.
- Get tailored legal advice. Commercial releases, disputes, identity imitation and unclear ownership warrant advice from a qualified attorney.
Questions to ask a publisher or administrator
- Is the agreement administration-only, co-publishing or a full publishing assignment?
- What copyright, territory and term are granted, and when do rights revert?
- What percentage, flat fee, advance, recoupment and expense provisions apply?
- Who owns the copyright, and what audit rights and reporting schedule exist?
- Who registers works with The MLC, PROs, foreign societies and sound-recording services?
- How are unmatched works, metadata disputes and ownership claims handled?
- What representations, warranties and disclosures apply to AI-assisted material?
- Who provides human support when a platform, licensee or collaborator challenges a claim?
Why administration may matter as much as litigation
AI debates often focus on training lawsuits, but payment still depends on ordinary data discipline. Title variations, wrong writer shares, missing publisher information, conflicting identifiers, duplicate registrations, undocumented verbal splits and foreign-collection gaps can all leave money unmatched. A sound recording can be registered without the composition, or a composition without the correct recording links.
The Copyright Office says The MLC maintains information about works and owners, supports claims and addresses unmatched works. That infrastructure does not eliminate the creator’s responsibility to keep ownership records accurate.
The bottom line for creators
Abowd’s central argument is practical: innovation is valuable when it expands human capability and improves rights administration, but not when permission, authorship or compensation disappear. The most defensible AI workflow is therefore documented, contract-aware and specific about which work, identity and royalty stream is involved.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →
