DistroKid Confirms UMG-Related Takedowns as Artists Dispute Removals
DistroKid says a small number of recordings have been removed in response to Universal Music Group claims. The Australian impact remains unconfirmed.
DistroKid has confirmed music takedowns in response to Universal Music Group (UMG) claims, as independent artists dispute removals and report receiving little explanation.
Speaking to The Verge, DistroKid’s VP of Artist Services, Amanda Ferri, acknowledged the actions.
“A very small number of recordings distributed through DistroKid have been removed in response to claims made by UMG,” Ferri said.
She said DistroKid strongly disputed the allegations underlying UMG’s lawsuit and regretted the disruption to affected artists. The company was working to minimise that disruption, she added.
The acknowledgement follows a complaint filed on September 15 in the US District Court for the District of Delaware by UMG Recordings, Capitol Records and Capitol CMG.
The companies allege deceptive trade practices and copyright infringement, including distribution of unauthorised remixes and altered recordings. The complaint also challenges DistroKid’s representations about mass-generated AI content. It expressly distinguishes those allegations from the distribution of clearly disclosed AI-generated music.
The Verge reported that musician McGwire said six of his songs had been removed, including a cover of Stevie Wonder’s “Isn’t She Lovely” that he said was licensed. He said he received no communication before or after the removals and had to seek an explanation.
Reporting from inside the Australian music business since '94.
Another musician, Insane Ian, told the publication an original song had been removed without warning or an explanation.
TMN has not independently verified the rights status of those recordings or the basis for their individual removals.
DistroKid’s published cover-song guidance distinguishes newly performed covers from remixes and recordings containing samples, which are ineligible for its cover-licensing service. That guidance alone does not resolve the reported dispute.
For Australian artists and managers, catalogue removals can interrupt audience access, release campaigns and streaming income. Whether Australian accounts have been affected by these particular actions remains unconfirmed.
Separately, as TMN recently reported, the US Copyright Office’s streaming-fraud inquiry includes questions about distributors’ content checks and removal practices. That inquiry concerns artificial streaming and is separate from UMG’s lawsuit.
TMN has contacted DistroKid seeking an Australian breakdown, the criteria behind the removals and details of review and reinstatement procedures. APRA AMCOS and AIR have also been asked whether members have reported similar takedowns. Responses were pending at the time of writing.
