Rights infrastructure was built around restriction: what is off limits, who has objected. AI partnerships need the opposite. Now what matters is knowing what every controlling contributor has actively said yes to.
Musical AI captures that consent and maintains it as a continuous inventory of what the catalog is cleared to do.
Rights systems were built to track objection. AI partnerships require the inverse: documented affirmative opt-in from every controlling contributor before a deal can move. Musical AI operates on the rights holder side of that boundary, where consent originates.
Sound recording, composition, and voice are tracked as independent consent tracks, with eligibility computed separately for each, because that is how the underlying agreements work.
Every consent action, revocation, and policy version is captured with MFA, identity verification, and non-repudiation, and recorded with a timestamp and a signature. The result is a defensible record of how every work reached its current state.
Splits get corrected, contributors get added, ownership shifts as deals close. Musical AI treats every metadata change as an event that recomputes eligibility, so the picture stays accurate without manual reconciliation.
Musical AI captures and computes consent state. We do not enforce it against AI companies, mediate disputes, interpret contracts, or determine compensation. Contested cases route to rights management for human resolution.
A short conversation is usually enough to determine fit.
Request a conversation
CONTACT SALES
