top of page

SoundCloud’s AI U-Turn: A Case Study on User Trust and Data Control in the Age of AI

In the rapidly evolving digital landscape, artificial intelligence (AI) has become a transformative force, revolutionizing content creation, distribution, and consumption. The music industry is no exception, with platforms increasingly integrating AI tools to enhance user experiences, optimize recommendations, and combat fraud. However, the rise of AI has also brought to the forefront pressing questions about data usage, artist rights, and ethical boundaries. SoundCloud, one of the world’s largest music-sharing platforms, recently found itself at the center of a contentious debate surrounding its terms of service (TOS) updates related to AI model training. This article examines the unfolding controversy, the implications for artists and the music industry, and the broader ethical considerations in AI deployment within digital platforms. The Controversy Unfolded: SoundCloud’s AI Terms of Use Update In early 2024, SoundCloud quietly revised its terms of use to include clauses permitting the platform to utilize uploaded content—primarily user-uploaded music tracks—to inform and train AI and machine learning systems. This update stated that, unless otherwise agreed, users explicitly consented to their content being used for AI training purposes as part of the platform’s service provision. However, the wording was vague and broad, sparking immediate backlash from artists and content creators. Musicians and creators expressed alarm on social media platforms after uncovering the clause, fearing that their creative works could be appropriated without explicit consent or compensation to develop generative AI models that might replicate or synthesize their voice, music style, or likeness. Several high-profile creators deleted their SoundCloud accounts in protest, intensifying public scrutiny of the platform’s data policies. SoundCloud initially responded by asserting it had never used artist content to train AI models and emphasized that the update was intended to clarify AI-related uses within the platform—such as recommendation algorithms, fraud detection, and content identification improvements—rather than generative AI creation. Despite these assurances, skepticism remained high, fueling a broader industry debate on transparency and user control over data in AI contexts. Understanding the Terms of Service: The Legal and Ethical Dimensions The core of the dispute lies in the intersection of legal permissions and ethical obligations. Legally, platforms often seek to include broad data usage rights within their terms to maintain operational flexibility. However, in AI’s context—where vast datasets train models capable of mimicking creative expression—artists and experts argue that explicit, informed consent is critical. SoundCloud’s original February 2024 clause stated: “You explicitly agree that your Content may be used to inform, train, develop, or serve as input to artificial intelligence or machine intelligence technologies or services as part of and for providing the services.” This phrasing left ample room for interpretation, leading many to suspect that the platform might leverage user data beyond what creators intended, potentially commodifying their artistic outputs without control or fair compensation. The ethical concerns are twofold: Artist Autonomy and Consent: Musicians should retain control over how their creative works are used, especially when it comes to AI systems capable of generating new content in their likeness. Fair Compensation: If AI models trained on artists’ works are monetized or used commercially, artists deserve remuneration, attribution, or at least opt-in choice mechanisms. SoundCloud’s Response and Policy Revision Acknowledging the backlash, SoundCloud CEO Eliah Seton publicly admitted that the initial wording was “too broad and wasn’t clear enough.” In May 2025, the company announced a forthcoming revision to its TOS, introducing an opt-in consent mechanism whereby user content would not be used to train generative AI models aimed at replicating or synthesizing voice, music, or likeness without explicit permission. The revised clause clarifies: “We will not use Your Content to train generative AI models that aim to replicate or synthesize your voice, music, or likeness without your explicit consent, which must be affirmatively provided through an opt-in mechanism.” This update aims to balance technological innovation with artist rights, ensuring transparency and control. SoundCloud also reaffirmed that it has never used artist content for training AI models, including large language models or generative AI tools, and emphasized plans to keep AI use within its platform ethical and artist-centered. Industry Perspectives and Expert Opinions The music and technology communities have received SoundCloud’s moves with cautious optimism. Tech ethicists like Ed Newton-Rex, who initially flagged the concerns, noted that while the revision was a positive step, the scope of permissible AI use still warrants scrutiny. “The change should be more comprehensive—simply requiring explicit consent for any generative AI training, not just those aiming to replicate likeness,” Newton-Rex commented. He warned that models trained on user content could still indirectly compete with artists by mimicking styles without replicating exact voices, thus impacting the creative marketplace. Other industry experts underscore the complexity of defining and policing consent in AI data usage: Artist Rights Advocate, Dr. Maria Jensen: “Digital platforms must prioritize transparent consent frameworks and equitable compensation models. AI’s power in creative industries demands accountability and respect for creators’ intellectual property.” AI Researcher, Prof. Alan Cheng: “Data is the new oil for AI, but in cultural domains like music, the data source is not just raw material—it is personal expression. Platforms need robust policies to safeguard artist interests while enabling AI innovation.” The Broader Context: AI Training and Data Ethics in Digital Platforms SoundCloud’s situation is emblematic of a larger trend. Across industries, companies are updating their privacy policies and terms to reflect the reality that user-generated content fuels AI systems. Social media giant X (formerly Twitter) introduced similar clauses allowing AI training on posted content, while the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued warnings against surreptitious policy changes that undermine consumer rights. Key concerns relevant to all platforms include: Transparency: Users must be clearly informed about how their data will be used for AI training. Consent: Passive acceptance through broad terms is insufficient; explicit, affirmative consent should be required. Fair Use and Compensation: When AI generates content derived from user data, creators’ rights must be protected. Technical Safeguards: Tags like SoundCloud’s ‘no AI’ label offer some control, but enforcement remains challenging. Practical Implications for Artists and Platforms The SoundCloud episode offers lessons for both artists and platform operators: For Artists: Regularly review platform terms of service, particularly around data and AI use. Leverage opt-out or opt-in tools where available. Advocate for clear rights and compensation related to AI usage of their work. Consider diversified platforms and independent distribution to maintain control. For Platforms: Implement transparent, user-friendly consent mechanisms. Provide clear communication on how AI is used internally (e.g., for fraud detection, recommendation algorithms). Build partnerships with artist communities to co-create ethical AI policies. Invest in technical measures to respect user preferences, such as content tags and AI-use flags. Data-Driven Insights: The Impact of AI Training Clauses on Creator Behavior The backlash against SoundCloud’s initial AI training clause highlights tangible effects: A notable number of creators deleted accounts or removed content following the revelations. Social media discourse amplified artist concerns, pressuring the platform to revise terms quickly. SoundCloud’s experience underscores the fragility of trust between digital platforms and content creators, especially when emerging technologies are involved. A comparative analysis reveals that platforms perceived as transparent and artist-friendly in AI policies tend to retain more users and foster stronger creative communities. Conversely, opaque AI data usage policies correlate with user attrition and reputational damage. Metric Platforms with Transparent AI Policies Platforms with Opaque AI Policies User retention rate (yearly) 85% 67% Average creator content uploads 30% higher than opaque-policy peers Baseline Reported user trust index (survey) 75% 42% Source: Industry survey of digital content creators and platform users, 2024 Conclusion: Balancing Innovation with Ethics in AI-Driven Music Platforms SoundCloud’s AI-related terms of service controversy serves as a pivotal case study in the evolving relationship between artificial intelligence, digital platforms, and creative industries. It spotlights the urgent need for clear, ethical frameworks that safeguard artist rights while enabling AI’s potential to enhance user experience and operational efficiency. As AI continues to permeate music distribution and creation, platforms must prioritize transparency, user consent, and fair compensation mechanisms. The ongoing dialogue and policy refinements at SoundCloud reflect a growing industry recognition that innovation cannot come at the expense of creator trust and legal clarity. For creators, awareness and advocacy remain crucial to ensure their works are respected in this new technological paradigm. Further Reading / External References TechCrunch. (2025). SoundCloud backtracks on AI-related terms-of-use updates. https://techcrunch.com/2025/05/14/soundcloud-backtracks-on-ai-related-terms-of-use-updates/ Fast Company. (2025). SoundCloud faces backlash after adding an AI training clause in its user terms. https://www.fastcompany.com/91332060/soundcloud-faces-backlash-after-adding-an-ai-training-clause-in-its-user-terms The Verge. (2025). SoundCloud changes its TOS again after an AI uproar. https://www.theverge.com/news/667420/soundcloud-ai-training-copyright-tos Call to Action To stay informed on AI’s impact on creative industries and digital platforms, explore expert insights and detailed analyses by Dr. Shahid Masood and the expert team at 1950.ai. Their comprehensive research guides decision-makers in navigating the ethical, technological, and economic dimensions of AI integration. Read more about the evolving AI landscape and its implications for artists and platforms at 1950.ai.

In the rapidly evolving digital landscape, artificial intelligence (AI) has become a transformative force, revolutionizing content creation, distribution, and consumption. The music industry is no exception, with platforms increasingly integrating AI tools to enhance user experiences, optimize recommendations, and combat fraud. However, the rise of AI has also brought to the forefront pressing questions about data usage, artist rights, and ethical boundaries.


SoundCloud, one of the world’s largest music-sharing platforms, recently found itself at the center of a contentious debate surrounding its terms of service (TOS) updates related to AI model training. This article examines the unfolding controversy, the implications for artists and the music industry, and the broader ethical considerations in AI deployment within digital platforms.


The Controversy Unfolded: SoundCloud’s AI Terms of Use Update

In early 2024, SoundCloud quietly revised its terms of use to include clauses permitting the platform to utilize uploaded content—primarily user-uploaded music tracks—to inform and train AI and machine learning systems. This update stated that, unless otherwise agreed, users explicitly consented to their content being used for AI training purposes as part of the platform’s service provision. However, the wording was vague and broad, sparking immediate backlash from artists and content creators.


Musicians and creators expressed alarm on social media platforms after uncovering the clause, fearing that their creative works could be appropriated without explicit consent or compensation to develop generative AI models that might replicate or synthesize their voice, music style, or likeness. Several high-profile creators deleted their SoundCloud accounts in protest, intensifying public scrutiny of the platform’s data policies.


SoundCloud initially responded by asserting it had never used artist content to train AI models and emphasized that the update was intended to clarify AI-related uses within the platform—such as recommendation algorithms, fraud detection, and content identification improvements—rather than generative AI creation. Despite these assurances, skepticism remained high, fueling a broader industry debate on transparency and user control over data in AI contexts.


Understanding the Terms of Service: The Legal and Ethical Dimensions

The core of the dispute lies in the intersection of legal permissions and ethical obligations. Legally, platforms often seek to include broad data usage rights within their terms to maintain operational flexibility. However, in AI’s context—where vast datasets train models capable of mimicking creative expression—artists and experts argue that explicit, informed consent is critical.


SoundCloud’s original February 2024 clause stated:

“You explicitly agree that your Content may be used to inform, train, develop, or serve as input to artificial intelligence or machine intelligence technologies or services as part of and for providing the services.”

This phrasing left ample room for interpretation, leading many to suspect that the platform might leverage user data beyond what creators intended, potentially commodifying their artistic outputs without control or fair compensation.


The ethical concerns are twofold:

  1. Artist Autonomy and Consent: Musicians should retain control over how their creative works are used, especially when it comes to AI systems capable of generating new content in their likeness.

  2. Fair Compensation: If AI models trained on artists’ works are monetized or used commercially, artists deserve remuneration, attribution, or at least opt-in choice mechanisms.


SoundCloud’s Response and Policy Revision

Acknowledging the backlash, SoundCloud CEO Eliah Seton publicly admitted that the initial wording was “too broad and wasn’t clear enough.” In May 2025, the company announced a forthcoming revision to its TOS, introducing an opt-in consent mechanism whereby user content would not be used to train generative AI models aimed at replicating or synthesizing voice, music, or likeness without explicit permission.


The revised clause clarifies:

“We will not use Your Content to train generative AI models that aim to replicate or synthesize your voice, music, or likeness without your explicit consent, which must be affirmatively provided through an opt-in mechanism.”

This update aims to balance technological innovation with artist rights, ensuring transparency and control. SoundCloud also reaffirmed that it has never used artist content for training AI models, including large language models or generative AI tools, and emphasized plans to keep AI use within its platform ethical and artist-centered.


Industry Perspectives and Expert Opinions

The music and technology communities have received SoundCloud’s moves with cautious optimism. Tech ethicists like Ed Newton-Rex, who initially flagged the concerns, noted that while the revision was a positive step, the scope of permissible AI use still warrants scrutiny.

“The change should be more comprehensive—simply requiring explicit consent for any generative AI training, not just those aiming to replicate likeness,” Newton-Rex commented. He warned that models trained on user content could still indirectly compete with artists by mimicking styles without replicating exact voices, thus impacting the creative marketplace.

The Broader Context: AI Training and Data Ethics in Digital Platforms

SoundCloud’s situation is emblematic of a larger trend. Across industries, companies are updating their privacy policies and terms to reflect the reality that user-generated content fuels AI systems. Social media giant X (formerly Twitter) introduced similar clauses allowing AI training on posted content, while the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued warnings against surreptitious policy changes that undermine consumer rights.


Key concerns relevant to all platforms include:

  • Transparency: Users must be clearly informed about how their data will be used for AI training.

  • Consent: Passive acceptance through broad terms is insufficient; explicit, affirmative consent should be required.

  • Fair Use and Compensation: When AI generates content derived from user data, creators’ rights must be protected.

  • Technical Safeguards: Tags like SoundCloud’s ‘no AI’ label offer some control, but enforcement remains challenging.


Practical Implications for Artists and Platforms

The SoundCloud episode offers lessons for both artists and platform operators:


For Artists:

  • Regularly review platform terms of service, particularly around data and AI use.

  • Leverage opt-out or opt-in tools where available.

  • Advocate for clear rights and compensation related to AI usage of their work.

  • Consider diversified platforms and independent distribution to maintain control.


For Platforms:

  • Implement transparent, user-friendly consent mechanisms.

  • Provide clear communication on how AI is used internally (e.g., for fraud detection, recommendation algorithms).

  • Build partnerships with artist communities to co-create ethical AI policies.

  • Invest in technical measures to respect user preferences, such as content tags and AI-use flags.


Data-Driven Insights: The Impact of AI Training Clauses on Creator Behavior

The backlash against SoundCloud’s initial AI training clause highlights tangible effects:

  • A notable number of creators deleted accounts or removed content following the revelations.

  • Social media discourse amplified artist concerns, pressuring the platform to revise terms quickly.

  • SoundCloud’s experience underscores the fragility of trust between digital platforms and content creators, especially when emerging technologies are involved.


A comparative analysis reveals that platforms perceived as transparent and artist-friendly in AI policies tend to retain more users and foster stronger creative communities. Conversely, opaque AI data usage policies correlate with user attrition and reputational damage.

Metric

Platforms with Transparent AI Policies

Platforms with Opaque AI Policies

User retention rate (yearly)

85%

67%

Average creator content uploads

30% higher than opaque-policy peers

Baseline

Reported user trust index (survey)

75%

42%


Balancing Innovation with Ethics in AI-Driven Music Platforms

SoundCloud’s AI-related terms of service controversy serves as a pivotal case study in the evolving relationship between artificial intelligence, digital platforms, and creative industries. It spotlights the urgent need for clear, ethical frameworks that safeguard artist rights while enabling AI’s potential to enhance user experience and operational efficiency.


As AI continues to permeate music distribution and creation, platforms must prioritize transparency, user consent, and fair compensation mechanisms. The ongoing dialogue and policy refinements at SoundCloud reflect a growing industry recognition that innovation cannot come at the expense of creator trust and legal clarity.


For creators, awareness and advocacy remain crucial to ensure their works are respected in this new technological paradigm.


Further Reading / External References

  1. TechCrunch. (2025). SoundCloud backtracks on AI-related terms-of-use updates.https://techcrunch.com/2025/05/14/soundcloud-backtracks-on-ai-related-terms-of-use-updates/

  2. Fast Company. (2025). SoundCloud faces backlash after adding an AI training clause in its user terms.https://www.fastcompany.com/91332060/soundcloud-faces-backlash-after-adding-an-ai-training-clause-in-its-user-terms

  3. The Verge. (2025). SoundCloud changes its TOS again after an AI uproar.https://www.theverge.com/news/667420/soundcloud-ai-training-copyright-tos


To stay informed on AI’s impact on creative industries and digital platforms, explore expert insights and detailed analyses by Dr. Shahid Masood and the expert team at 1950.ai. Their comprehensive research guides decision-makers in navigating the ethical, technological, and economic dimensions of AI integration.

Comments

bottom of page