Growth Product Manager

CVC Capital Partners has signed a definitive agreement to acquire a majority stake in DistroKid, whilst longtime investor Insight Partners will retain a significant minority interest. Financial terms were not disclosed. The deal is expected to close in Q3 pending customary approvals. Founded in 2013, DistroKid has become one of the largest players in independent music distribution, handling roughly 40% of all new music released worldwide and serving more than 4 million artists. The company has expanded beyond digital distribution into music video delivery, direct-to-fan tools, mastering, merchandising, marketing services and metadata management. President Phil Bauer will continue to oversee the company alongside its existing executive team. Goldman Sachs and The Raine Group served as financial advisers to DistroKid.

Your distributor just did a deal with AI - here's what that means for your music. Major distributors like DistroKid and TuneCore are signing AI training deals without your explicit consent. Learn what rights you're giving up, how royalties are affected, which distributors have opt-out options, and what to do now. Gavin Alexander Senior Marketeer Key takeaways. * Major distributors, including DistroKid, TuneCore, and CD Baby, have signed licensing deals with AI companies to use independent music catalogues for training data. * Most deals include opt-out mechanisms, but doing nothing means your music is in by default. * Artists retain master rights but give up control over how their catalogue trains AI tools unless they actively opt out. * Understanding these deals now lets you choose distributors strategically and protect your catalogue going forward. DistroKid signed a partnership with ElevenLabs in early 2024. TuneCore followed with deals covering Udio and Meta. Your distributor just licensed your catalogue to train AI audio tools, and unless you opted out within a specific window, your music is already in the dataset. What deals have been signed. DistroKid partnered with ElevenLabs to license music for AI voice model training. The deal covers the full catalogue distributed through their platform. Artists were notified via email with a 30-day opt-out window. If you did not respond, your catalogue was included by default. TuneCore signed separate agreements with Udio for generative music training and Meta for audio recognition models. The Udio deal is revenue-share based. Artists receive a portion of earnings generated when AI-created tracks use their music as training input. The Meta deal is a flat licensing fee with no artist revenue share. Both deals defaulted to opt-in unless artists explicitly opted out. CD Baby entered a data licensing agreement with an unnamed AI platform in Q2 2024. The agreement covers metadata and audio for training recommendation algorithms. No revenue share was disclosed. The opt-out process required artists to submit a form through their dashboard within 60 days of the announcement. These deals are not one-off experiments. They represent a structural shift in how distributors monetise the catalogues they handle. Your distributor is no longer just a pipeline to DSPs. They are now licensing your music to AI companies as part of their revenue model. What you are actually giving up. You still own your masters. That has not changed. What has changed is how your distributor uses the rights you granted them in your distribution agreement. Most distribution agreements include language allowing the distributor to "exploit, promote, and monetise" your music across platforms and services. That language was written before AI training datasets existed. Distributors are now interpreting those clauses to include AI licensing deals. You are not giving up ownership. You are giving up control over how your catalogue is used to train models that generate new audio. That means your vocal performance, production style, arrangement choices, and sonic signature can be ingested and replicated by an AI tool. Publishing rights are separate. If you control your own publishing, those rights are not included in these deals. If your distributor also handles publishing administration, check whether their AI licensing covers composition data or just master recordings. Royalty implications vary by deal. The Udio partnership includes a revenue share model. If an AI-generated track is trained on your music and monetised, you receive a percentage. The exact split is not public, but early reports suggest it sits between 5% and 15% of net revenue. The Meta deal pays nothing to individual artists. It is a flat fee paid to the distributor, and artists see none of it unless the distributor voluntarily shares proceeds. If you opted in by default, you are already part of the training set. Your music has been processed, tagged, and analysed. Opting out now does not remove your catalogue from models that have already been trained. It only prevents future use. How to opt out. Most distributors bury the opt-out process in dashboard settings or require email requests. DistroKid included an opt-out link in their original announcement email. If you missed that email or deleted it, you can contact support and request removal from the ElevenLabs dataset. Expect a response time of 7 to 14 days. TuneCore requires you to log into your account, navigate to account settings, and toggle off AI licensing under distribution preferences. The setting is not labelled clearly. Look for "third-party data partnerships" or "AI training opt-out." If you cannot find it, email support with your artist name and request manual removal. CD Baby requires a form submission. The form is located under the help centre, not in your main dashboard. Search for "AI opt-out" in their knowledge base. Fill out the form with your release titles and distribution dates. Confirmation emails take up to 30 days. If you do nothing, you remain opted in. That is the default position across all three distributors. Opting out is entirely manual. There is no automatic protection. Some distributors are clearer than others. Ditto Music and Amuse have not announced AI deals as of this writing. If you are considering switching distributors, ask directly whether they have signed or plan to sign AI licensing agreements. Get the answer in writing. How to position yourself. This shift is not going away. More distributors will sign similar deals. Artists who understand the structure now can make better decisions about where they distribute, what rights they protect, and how they position their catalogue. Start by auditing your current distributor agreement. Read the rights grant section. Look for language around "exploitation," "monetisation," or "third-party partnerships." If that language is broad, assume it covers AI licensing unless stated otherwise. If you are releasing new music, ask your distributor about AI licensing before you upload. Request written confirmation that your catalogue will not be included in training datasets without explicit consent. If they cannot provide that, consider switching. Track your agreements inside Music Artist Manager. Store your distributor contract, upload opt-out confirmations, and set reminders to review terms annually. Distributors update their terms regularly. If you miss an email notification, you miss your opt-out window. Negotiate better terms if you have leverage. If you deliver consistent streams or manage multiple artists, you can request custom clauses that exclude AI licensing or require explicit consent per release. Not every distributor will agree, but some will if your catalogue has value. Understand the revenue models. If you stay opted in, know which deals pay you and which do not. If the deal includes revenue share, track whether you actually receive payments. If the deal is flat-fee only, you are giving up data for free. This is not about being pro-AI or anti-AI. It is about knowing what rights you control, what rights your distributor controls, and how those rights are being monetised. Artists who treat this as a contract issue, not a culture war, will build better infrastructure. Music Artist Manager helps you track distribution agreements, store contracts, and stay on top of what your distributor is doing with your music. Visit musicartistmanager.com to start organising your catalogue and protecting your rights. Related reading: Further reading: Ready to streamline your workflow? Stop piecing together spreadsheets and scattered notes. Join the waitlist for Music Artist Manager and get your entire rollout in one place. Gavin Alexander. Senior Marketeer As the founder of Music Artist Manager, Gavin has spent years at the intersection of music and technology. Seeing firsthand how chaotic release rollouts and split sheets can be, he designed a platform that brings major-label infrastructure to independent artists and their teams. He writes extensively about industry trends, artist leverage, and workflow optimisation.

DistroKid is now asking creators if their music is ai-generated as 'self-disclosure' strategy moves out of beta. DistroKid is now asking creators if their music is ai-generated as 'self-disclosure' strategy moves out of beta ashley king may 14, 2026. As Spotify tests AI credit labels in a beta rollout, DistroKid is now asking creators to disclose what parts, if any, of their tracks are AI-assisted. Last month, Spotify launched a beta test alongside DistroKid of a new feature that exposes artificial intelligence assistance within track credits, part of a major step towards platform-level transparency. Now, DistroKid has broadly launched its own process for creators to disclose whether their music was AI-assisted, and to what extent. As of this morning, Distrokid still appears to be rolling out the self-reporting process, though artists will only encounter the expanded questions while uploading new material. One important note about both sides of this launch is that it relies on creators self-reporting their AI usage - something bad actors will be less inclined to do. Unlike Deezer, where AI-assisted music is automatically tagged, DistroKid (and Spotify) provides users with a tool to disclose what, if any, aspects of their track were AI-generated or assisted. That means that the absence of an AI credit does not necessarily confirm that AI tools were not used in the creation process, though both Distrokid and Spotify could modify their approaches down the line. As mentioned, DistroKid is only asking creators to disclose AI usage on new uploads, so it isn't implemented retroactively. It also assumes users are going to answer honestly; of course, failure to do so could result in copyright strikes and other murky legal waters. But that's not likely to deter those who just want to circulate their output and don't care about potential legal repercussions. As with the Spotify beta tool, the DistroKid rollout is more akin to an early testing stage rather than a fully fleshed-out solution. But it launches amid increasing competition for AI disclosure frameworks, in which companies are mostly just throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks. To that end, Apple Music has launched its own Transparency Tags system, which is now required as part of music delivery for labels. But this too requires honest reporting from content providers; so far, only Deezer - whose AI-identification tool is now on offer for other companies to license - has unlocked an automatic, platform-wide solution. At the end of the day, some action taken is better than none at all, but it will undoubtedly require more than asking users to be honest about their AI use to provide a blanket solution across DSPs.