The Blue Wave Could Mean a Rising Tide for Songwriters — Here’s Why (Guest Post)

David Israelite is the president & CEO of the National Music Publishers’ Association, the trade association representing American music publishers and their songwriting partners. Variety welcomes responsible commentary, please send ideas to music@variety.com.

The political tidal wave that swept across America will have consequences far beyond Washington. For the music industry, and particularly for the songwriters and music publishers who create the songs that power it, the election is the beginning of a new era.

Democrats have captured control of both the House and Senate. A new, younger generation of lawmakers is coming to Washington. This generation rode a growing sentiment that is skeptical of Big Tech – from AI to oligarchs who have had a stronghold on Washington.

The Judiciary committees will have new leadership. And the technology companies that have increasingly dominated our industry will face a very different political landscape.

For songwriters, these changes present significant opportunities.

To be clear, songwriter issues do not favor any political party. Songwriters have a right to be paid fairly for their work. That has always been a bipartisan cause.

Our strongest champions have been both Republicans and Democrats. Remember, the Music Modernization Act was introduced by Congressmen Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) – the potential next Speaker of the House – and Doug Collins (R-GA). And that is precisely why this election creates such an interesting opportunity.

New leadership means new priorities.

No Congressional committees matter more to the music industry than the House and Senate Judiciary Committees and their intellectual property subcommittees.

These lawmakers oversee copyright law, consider legislation affecting music licensing, and help determine how our intellectual property system adapts to new technology.

With Democrats taking control of Congress, these committees will have new chairs, new agendas and new opportunities to examine issues that have too often been overlooked.

That does not mean our Republican champions will become unimportant. We have spent years building relationships with members of both parties who understand the value of American intellectual property. Those relationships remain essential.

But new leadership creates opportunities for new conversations, perspectives, and hopefully, new legislation.

No issue presents a greater long-term challenge to the creative community than artificial intelligence. And AI faces a new political reality.

The question is no longer whether AI will transform the music business. It already has. The question is whether the companies developing these technologies will be allowed to build their businesses on the work of human creators without permission or compensation.

For too long, the technology industry has promoted a dangerous proposition: that innovation requires weakening copyright protections.

It doesn’t.

The incoming Congress has an opportunity to establish clear rules on the use of copyrighted works for AI training, demand meaningful transparency from technology companies, and protect the voices and identities of human creators.

These should not be partisan questions. The principle that someone cannot simply take another person’s property to build a commercial business transcends political ideology.

It’s time to reorient the relationship between Big Tech and songwriters.

Perhaps the greatest opportunity presented by the new Congress is a fresh examination of how the federal government treats the individuals who create music compared with the giant tech companies that exploit it.

For decades, songwriters have operated under an extraordinary system of government regulation.

The balance of power is backwards.

The mechanical compulsory license regulating songwriters dates back to 1909. It’s outdated and protects the wrong parties.

The consent decrees governing ASCAP and BMI date back to 1941. Think about that. Rules established when Americans listened to music on radios from their local broadcasting station still constrain how songwriters negotiate compensation in the age of streaming, AI, and trillion-dollar technology companies.

Meanwhile, the largest technology companies have accumulated unprecedented economic power.

We have somehow created a system in which the government regulates the songwriters while the technology giants that depend on their work wield enormous marketplace power.

That imbalance deserves serious congressional scrutiny.

The new Congress should examine whether antiquated compulsory licenses and consent decrees continue to serve their intended purposes or instead provide powerful digital platforms with negotiating advantages at the expense of creators.

This is not an argument against antitrust enforcement. Quite the opposite. It is an argument for applying competition principles fairly, consistently and in ways that reflect the marketplace as it actually exists today.

A system designed to protect competition should not become a tool that allows the largest corporations in the world to squeeze the smallest creators.

An exciting consequence of a wave election is the arrival of so many new members of Congress.

That is an opportunity.

The music industry has an extraordinary story to tell. American songs are among our most valuable cultural exports. Songwriters are entrepreneurs and small-business owners. And the economic benefits of music extend to communities in every state and congressional district.

Our job is to make sure these new lawmakers understand that protecting songwriters means protecting American jobs, American innovation and American intellectual property.

For too long, the rules governing songwriters have reflected the marketplace of yesterday rather than the realities of tomorrow.

The election belonged to the Democrats. The opportunity belongs to songwriters.