DistroKid removes songs over UMG’s AI-music lawsuit while disputing its claims

DistroKid has removed recordings in response to claims in Universal Music Group’s lawsuit, bringing the dispute over AI-generated music and copyright infringement directly to affected artists. On October 12, 2026, artist-services vice president Amanda Ferri confirmed the action to Billboard. She described the number of recordings removed as “very small.”

Users first flagged the takedowns on social media. The Verge then first reported their connection to UMG’s September lawsuit, according to Billboard. Ferri’s statement confirmed that the removals were a response to UMG’s claims, rather than an unrelated distribution decision.

Two allegations behind the takedowns

UMG sued DistroKid in September 2026 for alleged deceptive trade practices and copyright infringement. The lawsuit alleges that the distributor siphoned money from the streaming royalty pool through two mechanisms: flooding Spotify and other services with massive amounts of AI-generated music, and distributing allegedly infringing tracks that speed up, remix or sample existing music. UMG described the material as “mass AI-generated, SEO-optimized, and copyright-infringing slop”—including music optimized to appear in search results.

We strongly dispute the allegations underlying UMG’s lawsuit and regret the disruption to affected artists. We are working to minimize that disruption while protecting artists’ ability to release their music.

Amanda Ferri, DistroKid vice president of artist services, to Billboard

Artists challenge which songs were removed

Which types of recordings were subject to DistroKid’s takedowns remains unclear. That distinction is important: the lawsuit concerns both AI-generated music and allegedly unauthorized uses of existing recordings. The removals cannot simply be described as a purge of AI-generated songs.

Some DistroKid users complained online that their removed songs were neither AI-generated nor unlicensed, according to Billboard. Those assertions have not been independently verified. Their objections concern the selection of recordings taken down, not just the disruption caused by losing access to distribution.

Users also complained about slow customer-service responses from DistroKid. Alongside objections to the removals themselves, those complaints raise a practical concern for affected artists: getting a response from the distributor.