Copyright protects your creative work and ensures that you, the songwriter, can control how it is used, performed, and licensed. Without copyright protection, anyone could use your song freely, including for commercial purposes, without your permission. Technically, the moment you create and fix your song in a tangible form (such as writing it down or recording it), it is automatically protected by copyright. However, registering your copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office provides official proof of ownership and strengthens your legal standing in case of a copyright dispute.
If you transfer or assign your copyright ownership to a music publisher, the publisher gains control over how the song is used and licensed. In this case, the publisher receives the publisher’s share of royalties while you continue to receive the writer’s share.
Here’s a real-world example: When Paul Simon wrote, recorded,
and published "The Sound of Silence" in 1964, he had no way of knowing
that in 2015, the hard rock band Disturbed would re-record ("cover") and release it as a single. Their
version became a hit and reached #1 on the Billboard Hard Rock Chart. Because Paul Simon was the copyright owner at the time, he received royalties from the song’s performance and mechanical licenses. In 2021, Paul Simon sold his entire songwriting catalog to Sony Music Publishing for approximately $250 million. As a result, Sony now owns the copyright to The Sound of Silence and his other songs. Moving forward, Sony—not Paul Simon—will collect all publishing income and control how his songs are licensed or used while Paul Simon continues to collect the writer’s share of the income.
Misinformation and incorrect terminology about a song's copyright often leads to confusion. So, first we need to agree on clear definitions.
- Music – A sequence of sounds arranged in a melodic structure. When human-authored, a melody is copyrightable as part of a song. Note that production, demos, chords, and arrangements are not copyrightable since copyright protects a melody’s specific expression, not general musical ideas or styles.
- Lyrics – Words intended to be paired with music. When human-authored, lyrics are copyrightable and may be protected separately from the melody.
- Song – A composition consisting of both melody and lyrics. When human-authored, the melody, lyrics, or entire song can be copyrighted individually or together. AI-generated melodies or lyrics alone are not copyrightable under current U.S. law.
- Demo – A demonstration recording of a song (melody + lyrics) to showcase the composition before full production. If AI generates any part of the melody, the result is an AI-assisted composition—not just a demo. In this case, saying that AI was used “only for the demo" is misleading.
- Production – The instrumentation and arrangement in a recording. While production affects the final sound, it does not determine the copyrightable composition (melody + lyrics). A human-authored sound recording (master recording) can be separately copyrighted, but this is distinct from the song’s underlying composition copyright.
- Ownership – Paying for an AI-generated song (e.g., via Suno) does not grant copyright ownership. AI platforms may provide usage rights under their Terms of Service, but under current U.S. Copyright law, only human-authored works are eligible for copyright. AI-generated music cannot be legally “owned” in the same way as human-authored compositions.
- Public Domain – Works free for public use because they are no longer protected by copyright, were dedicated to the public domain, or were never eligible for copyright (e.g., AI-generated works under current law).
Now that we understand copyright and the correct terminology, let’s talk about what happens when AI-generated music and/or lyrics enter the picture. As of January 28, 2025, the U.S. Register of Copyrights ruled that AI-generated works (lyrics or melody) cannot be copyrighted unless there is a “sufficient amount of human expression.” If AI generates any part or all of your melody based on your lyrics, the AI-generated portion is not eligible for copyright. Even if an AI Platform’s Terms of Service allow you to use AI-generated material commercially, according to the U.S. Copyright Office, you cannot claim ownership or copyright on that material because it lacks human authorship.
Back to Paul Simon. If generative AI existed when Paul Simon wrote The Sound of Silence, and rather than writing his own original music, he let AI generate the music, the resulting music would not have been eligible for copyright protection. Since there would be no human author, it would have no legal owner and, like an uncopyrightable work, could be used by anyone without restriction. Anyone could use that music for their own purposes and profit. They could even add their own human-authored lyrics to it, in which case their new lyrics would be eligible for copyright protection, but the underlying music still would not be since it was rendered by AI, not written by a human.
Making edits to AI-generated material does not grant full copyright ownership, nor does "putting your own spin" on the production. Only the portions that you change with significant human transformation are eligible for copyright protection—AI-generated portions remain ineligible. Modifications or rearrangements are not enough to establish human authorship.
What If I used prompts to get the music or lyrics exactly how I want? According to the U.S. Copyright Office, if you write only the lyrics and AI generates the music, you can only copyright the lyrics, not the melody or the full song (lyrics + melody). Similarly, if you compose the melody but use AI to generate the lyrics, only the melody is copyrightable. Prompting AI to generate a melody or lyrics—no matter how detailed—does not qualify as human-authored.
An analogy: Let’s say you’re a woodworker who designs and handcrafts furniture. Your handcrafted furniture, designed, shaped, and built by a human, is considered an original work of craftsmanship and can be copyrighted. Compare this to a person using a computer-controlled furniture-making machine (a CNC) that automatically carves, shapes, and assembles furniture based on digital instructions. While you provide input, the machine is doing the creative execution.
In the same way, writing lyrics or a melody yourself is like handcrafting furniture — you’re the creator, and it’s copyrightable. However, prompting AI to generate a melody or lyrics is like inputting a design into a CNC machine. It follows your instructions, but you are not considered the creator under copyright law..
Example Scenarios:
This question has both legal and philosophical considerations. A demo is a recorded version of a song (melody + lyrics) used for pitching or reference. If AI is used only for demo production (e.g., AI-generated vocals or backing tracks), but a human (or humans) wrote the underlying song (melody + lyrics), the song itself remains copyrightable. However, the AI-generated elements of the demo are not eligible for copyright protection as a sound recording because they lack human authorship.
Using AI to create a demo for a song you wrote (melody + lyrics) is generally acceptable, much like hiring session musicians to record a demo. The key distinction is that the AI-generated elements cannot be copyrighted as a sound recording. AI simply provides instrumentation or vocalization for your composition, which does not affect your copyright to the melody and lyrics. However, if AI generated any portion of the melody or lyrics, it is misleading to claim you “demoed” a fully human-written song. In such cases, you must disclose AI’s involvement in the songwriting process).
The philosophical dilemma. Many songwriters use AI to generate demos because the process is cost-effective and efficient. AI allows songwriters to experiment with production, tempo, and arrangement quickly. Some people argue that using AI reduces opportunities for real musicians and vocalists. Others note that technological advancements—such as Digital Audio Workstations (DAWs) like ProTools and Cubase—have also changed the industry. Some songwriters choose to have real musicians recreate their AI demos in the studio for industry credibility.
Yes, with exceptions. A pitch guest will not accept AI-generated material in certain situations, such as when sync licensing restrictions apply.
However, for any pitch that does accept AI, you must clearly state how AI was used in your submission. This information must be included in the "notes to pitch guest" field and/or on the "lyric sheet" to ensure full transparency regarding AI’s role in your song. Use the following guidelines:
- If you used AI for ANY portion of the lyrics or melody, you must specify which parts were AI-generated and which were authored by you.
- If you and/or another human wrote all of the lyrics and melody but used AI to create a demo, state that your song was fully human-authored and that AI was used only for demo production.
- If you supply lyrics to any AI Platform and allow AI to generate any part of the melody or lyrics, you must disclose it (e.g., 'I wrote the lyrics, but Suno generated the melody and the demo'). If AI-generated both the melody and lyrics, this must also be clearly stated.
The takeaway: A human-authored song may utilize AI to create the demo, but if any part of the lyric or melody is AI-generated, the song must not be misrepresented as fully human-written in any pitch submission.
- Sync Agents – AI-generated songs create legal uncertainty for licensing in film, TV, and advertisements. Since AI-generated content lacks clear copyright ownership, securing rights for use can be risky.
- Music Publishers – Publishers typically require clear ownership of songs to manage rights and collect royalties. If part of a song is AI-generated and lacks copyright protection, it complicates the ability to monetize the work.
- Recording Artists – Many artists avoid AI-generated songs due to legal uncertainties, rights management issues, and ethical concerns about AI in creative works.
Full transparency is required when pitching AI-assisted songs at SongU.com so pitch guests can make informed decisions based on legal, financial, and other considerations.
Some instructors in our live Song Feedback Courses (FDBK) may be open to discussing AI-generated songs as part of the educational process. However, they may choose not to provide detailed feedback on AI-generated portions of a song. Some may only offer general comments on the overall feel, while others may decline to evaluate AI-generated material entirely.
Our song evaluation coaches generally focus on human-authored songwriting. While some may provide feedback on AI-assisted songs, they are not required to review AI-generated portions. We have asked all our coaches to add a note in their coaching philosophy area about how they intend to handle AI-generated content.
If you submit a song with AI-generated elements, you must disclose this upfront so the instructor or coach can determine how to proceed.
Falsely claiming AI-generated content as human-created when registering a work with the U.S. Copyright Office can lead to serious legal and professional consequences. Music publishers and licensing agents require clear copyright ownership, and misrepresentation can permanently damage your credibility and future opportunities in the music industry.
In addition, knowingly submitting an AI-generated work as fully human-created is considered a false statement on a federal form and can result in:
- Cancellation of your copyright registration – If the Copyright Office discovers AI-generated portions were misrepresented, they can invalidate your registration.
- Civil penalties, including fines and potential lawsuits, especially if you attempt to monetize the falsely registered work.
- Legal liability under U.S. law – knowingly falsifying a government form violates federal law.
- Criminal penalties in extreme cases – If the misrepresentation is part of a broader fraudulent scheme, you could be charged under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, which carries fines of up to $250,000 and a maximum prison sentence of five years.
The takeaway: Misrepresenting AI-generated work as human-authored is not worth the risk.
Possibly. But as of now (February 2025), music publishers, sync agents, and labels still rely on traditional copyright protections. AI-generated songs remain difficult to license because they lack clear ownership and cannot be copyrighted, making rights management uncertain for commercial use.
The U.S. Copyright Office is preparing a third report, which may address the legal implications of AI training on copyrighted works and how AI-assisted content should be handled. Additionally, ongoing lawsuits against AI companies could set legal precedents that influence copyright policies for AI-generated music.
Some companies, such as Monarrch and Humanable, are developing systems to track AI-generated content and identify copyrighted material used in AI training. If widely adopted, such systems could lead to new licensing models for AI-assisted songwriting that ensure compensation for original copyright holders. Currently, the long-term adoption and use of these solutions remains to be seen.
For the most up-to-date and legally accurate information, we recommend:
- U.S. Copyright Office – The primary authority on U.S. copyright law, including AI-related rulings.
- Copyright Alliance – A nonprofit organization providing expert copyright law resources and advocacy.
- Stanford Copyright & Fair Use Center – A legal research center offering clear explanations of copyright law.
- Qualified Music and Copyright Attorneys – Consulting a qualified entertainment attorney is the best course of action if you have specific legal concerns.
For industry perspectives on AI and licensing, you may also check:
- ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers)
- BMI (Broadcast Music, Inc.)
Be cautious of outdated, misleading, or non-authoritative online sources. Some websites promote false claims about AI disclosure rules or suggest ways to bypass legal requirements, which could put you at risk of copyright violations or legal consequences.
As of February 2025, the most recent guidance on AI-generated music and copyright law is found in the U.S. Copyright Office’s report, Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 2: Copyrightability, which provides the current legal stance on AI-generated music and lyrics. We recommend staying informed on new developments since AI copyright laws may continue to evolve.