A year ago, most independent artists in India treated "AI music" as somebody else's problem. A few people were making Suno songs for fun on Instagram, and that was it. That has changed. The three platforms that matter most for a new release, Spotify, YouTube and (for anyone watching the global numbers) Deezer, have all written AI into their rulebooks, and they have not written the same rules.
This piece puts the three side by side, using only what the companies themselves have published.
Deezer: count it, tag it, keep it out of recommendations
Deezer has been the most open about the scale. In September 2025 it said it was receiving over 30,000 fully AI-generated tracks every day, about 28% of everything delivered to it. By January 2026 that number had roughly doubled to around 60,000 tracks a day, close to 39% of daily intake, with more than 13.4 million AI tracks detected and tagged across 2025.
The more uncomfortable figure is about listening, not uploads. Deezer says AI-generated tracks made up only a small share of total streams (between 1% and 3%), yet up to 85% of the streams on those tracks were detected as fraudulent in 2025. Its conclusion is blunt: fake streams are the main reason people upload fully synthetic music in bulk.
Deezer's response has three parts:
- Albums containing fully AI-generated tracks carry a visible tag.
- Those tracks are kept out of algorithmic recommendations and editorial playlists.
- Streams it detects as manipulated are removed from the royalty pool.
Spotify: AI is allowed, spam and impersonation are not
Spotify took a different route. In its September 2025 announcement it said it had removed more than 75 million "spammy" tracks in the previous 12 months, and laid out three changes: a stricter impersonation policy, a new music spam filter, and support for AI disclosures in song credits.
The spam filter is the part most artists should read twice. According to Spotify and reporting by The Verge, it looks for behaviour, not just audio: mass uploads, duplicates with slightly changed metadata, SEO tricks in titles, and tracks that run only a little over 30 seconds to collect royalty-bearing plays. Uploaders flagged by the system are tagged and their tracks stop being recommended.
On disclosure, Spotify is backing a credit standard developed through DDEX, the body that sets the data formats labels and distributors use. Artists who used AI for vocals, instrumentation or post-production can say so through their label or distributor. Spotify was clear that disclosing AI use is not meant to push a track down. Unauthorised voice clones and deepfakes of real artists, though, are removed.
YouTube: the issue is "inauthentic", not "AI"
YouTube's change was quieter. On 15 July 2025 it renamed its "repetitious content" monetisation rule to "inauthentic content" and clarified that it covers mass-produced and repetitive uploads. YouTube said this was not a new policy, since such content was never eligible for the Partner Program. Its help page now lists, among other examples, AI-generated content built on generic templates "giving the impression of mass production" without the creator's own input.
YouTube also said channels that use AI tools remain eligible to earn, as long as realistic altered or synthetic content is disclosed.
So where do the three agree?
Put the documents next to each other and a pattern shows up. None of them bans AI as a tool. All of them go after the same behaviour:
- uploading huge volumes of near-identical tracks
- faking listeners with bots or paid stream farms
- copying or cloning a real artist's voice or identity
Deezer goes furthest by tagging and de-recommending fully synthetic tracks. Spotify relies on disclosure plus spam detection. YouTube ties it to monetisation.
What this means for a release from India
Think of a Haryanvi singer in Rohtak who uses an AI tool to clean up a rough vocal, or a devotional label in Varanasi that writes its own bhajans and records them with a real singer. Neither is the target of these rules. The target is the account that pushes 400 "lofi bhajan" files in a week, each 31 seconds long, hoping a bot farm will play them.
Where things can go wrong for genuine artists is association. If your distributor is careless about who it lets in, its whole catalogue can draw scrutiny. That is a good reason to release through a distributor that reviews what it delivers and knows the people behind the uploads.
A few habits that keep you on the right side of all three platforms:
- Release finished songs, not filler. One strong single beats twenty short loops.
- Keep metadata honest: real artist name, real song title, no keyword stuffing.
- If AI played a real part in the vocals or instruments, be ready to say so.
- Never buy streams, playlist placements that promise numbers, or "guaranteed growth".
Releasing with RMX Music
RMX Music is an Indian distributor working with 3,000+ artists and 2,200+ labels, with more than 20,000 tracks delivered to 95+ platforms, including Spotify, JioSaavn, YouTube Music, Apple Music and callertune services. Releases usually go live in 24-48 hours, artists keep 100% ownership and 95% of royalties, and payouts are monthly. YouTube Content ID and Visual Claims are available to protect your songs when others reupload them.
The Label plan is a one-time ₹4,500 for life, and the Agent plan is ₹15,000 lifetime for people managing many artists. If you make real music, with or without AI help along the way, create your RMX Music account here and put your next release out properly.