IMPEL and IMPF call for clearer AI music licences and payment information.
- Record date
- 30 Sept 2026
- Last verified
- 2026-10-12
- Next review
- 2026-10-19
Joint statement released 30 September.
What happened
IMPEL and IMPF, organisations representing independent music publishers, published a joint statement on fair AI licensing. They call for clear licence terms, transparent payment calculations and recognition of the musical composition, not just the recording. Their tests of attribution are still being assessed; they do not prove that creators are paid effectively.
ALUN's view
ALUN's view: rights in a song and rights in its recording are different. Ask what a licence allows, who gets paid and what information must be reported.
What is still unclear
This is an industry position, not law or a concluded licence. Universal adoption and effective remuneration are not established. These are not PIKAT recommendations.
What it may mean for you
- Musicians and cultural workers: Ask what rights and uses are licensed and how payments and attribution are calculated.
- Institutions: Check what the licence allows and what must be reported. Access to a tool does not mean you have permission to use every work.
- Policy makers: Treat these as publisher proposals, not an adopted remuneration standard.
Where did this come from?
- Joint Statement: IMPEL and IMPF on Fair Licensing for Generative AI
IMPEL and IMPF · Stakeholder position
Source date: 2026-09-30
Source location: Joint statement, pages 1-2
Related source records