IMPEL and IMPF published a joint licensing framework for generative AI today (September 30).
The two independent music publishing organizations set out seven principles they say should govern generative AI licensing.
The framework’s central demand is that the song not be treated as the junior partner to the recording.
“One principle is non-negotiable: the song must be properly valued and, absent other salient factors, at least equally with the recording,” IMPEL and IMPF said in a joint statement.
IMPEL (Independent Music Publishers’ E-Licensing) is the London-based international collective licensing agency representing independent publishers’ digital rights. It is owned and controlled by its members. IMPF (Independent Music Publishers International Forum) is the Brussels-based global trade body for independent music publishers, which says it advocates for more than 300 companies worldwide.
The two organizations are now calling on collective management organizations (CMOs) and other licensors to support the principles.
The framework covers revenue allocations between master and publishing rights; payments for past use, training, outputs, and future exploitation; and mechanisms to establish trust and transparency, IMPEL and IMPF said.
“In generative AI, songs, lyrics, melodies and compositions are central to the training, prompting, generation, output and commercialization of AI music products,” the joint statement reads.
“Whilst AI generation can take place in various forms that must be treated on their merits, any licensing model that, ab initio [from the outset], treats publishing as a minor share of value while allocating the overwhelming majority of revenues to master rights is unacceptable.
“After years of addressing unequal revenue splits in streaming, the independent publishing community sees generative AI as an opportunity to establish a fairer framework, not another market in which outdated assumptions about the value of masters and compositions are carried forward.”
“The principles we have established here have been designed to protect songs and songwriters, and ensure they are properly valued,” said IMPEL CEO Sarah Williams.
“With the music business at a new inflection point, it is crucial that we take a strong stance that will set the right precedent for the industry going forward.”
“With the music business at a new inflection point, it is crucial that we take a strong stance that will set the right precedent for the industry going forward.”
Sarah Williams, IMPEL
IMPF President Annette Barrett, of Reservoir, said: “IMPF exists to give independent publishers and the songwriters we represent a collective voice, a mission that has never mattered more, as our industry navigates disruptive change and new rules are being written. The song needs protecting as the keystone of it all.”
The statement arrives almost four months after the National Music Publishers’ Association announced an industry-wide AI licensing deal with Udio.
NMPA President and CEO David Israelite said in June that the Udio agreement was the first to “value songs and sound recordings equally” when it comes to AI training.
IMPF has been publishing positions on AI since 2023, when it proposed four ethical principles for AI developers, covering copyright compliance, record-keeping on works used in machine learning, a clear distinction between human-created and AI-generated works, and a delineation between assistive and fully generative AI applications.
“IMPF exists to give independent publishers and the songwriters we represent a collective voice, a mission that has never mattered more, as our industry navigates disruptive change and new rules are being written. The song needs protecting as the keystone of it all.”
Annette Barrett, IMPF
It followed those in December 2025 with its own set of key principles for CMO licensing models for generative AI, having days earlier urged publishers not to accept AI licensing agreements that fail to allocate half of proceeds to songwriters and publishers. Wednesday’s statement is the first generative AI licensing framework IMPEL and IMPF have published jointly.
The new framework also addresses the scope of what is being licensed, and warns against early deals setting wider precedents.
“Limited pilots, closed environments or specific product models must not be used to create broad precedents for future exploitation,” the statement reads.
“Rightsholders must understand what is being licensed, how works are being used, how attribution will operate, what deductions are being applied, and how revenues will be calculated and distributed.”
IMPEL and IMPF said they are running three pilots with different companies to assess attribution technologies. Neither body named those companies in Wednesday’s statement.
“These pilots are examining how technologies can support the identification, tracking and attribution of musical works across AI training, generation and outputs, as well as the reporting necessary for accurate remuneration,” the statement reads.
The two organizations named one of those partners in July, when they announced a joint sandbox project with attribution startup Sureel AI. Participating publishers test select repertoire in a closed environment to see how the technology detects when their work has been used to train AI models.
By then, the startup was on its way into major-label ownership. Warner Music Group agreed to acquire Sureel a month earlier, though WMG said at the time that Sureel would continue to operate as a standalone platform serving the wider music and AI ecosystem.
Attribution has become a central question for publishers, with veteran music publisher Monica Corton arguing in an MBW op/ed in April that the industry should be “fully invested in understanding every attribution engine on the market.”
Independent publishers held 26.3% of global music publisher revenues in 2024, excluding those with more than 5% market share, namely BMG and Kobalt, according to IMPF’s Global Market View report published in December 2025.
That report cited studies from SGAE in Spain and KODA in Denmark, and estimated that EUR €3.5 billion in collections could be at risk from generative AI, of which €465 million would come directly out of independent publishers’ revenues.
IMPEL and IMPF said they remain open to doing deals.
“We support innovation. We support responsible experimentation. We support constructive licensing discussions. But innovation cannot be built on unclear terms, unfair economics or licensing models that undervalue the song,” the statement reads.
“Generative AI is shaping the next phase of the music economy. The rules being set now will have long-term consequences.
“IMPEL and IMPF urge all parties to work with independent publishers and songwriters to build a licensing framework that recognizes the true value of the song and creates a fair, sustainable market for the future.”Music Business Worldwide
