Written By: Reanne Thomas
Take a scroll through Instagram or TikTok, and you are likely come across a snippet of a leaked, unreleased song by the time you reach the fifth post. The song or piece of audio is commonly being used in the background of a video, or the subject of a review by a self-proclaimed music reporter trying to uncover the details of the leak.
Leaked snippets of an upcoming album may provide temporary satisfaction to fans as an initial taster as to what is to come, but it also places pressure on artists and musicians to release the full album or project, ahead of projected timelines and pre-agreed deadlines. Depending on the source of such leaks, unauthorised distribution of an artist’s music can result in snippets going viral, albeit at the artist’s expense.
Earlier this year, SZA took to X (formerly known as Twitter) to express her anger when music from her anticipated forthcoming album, Lana, as a follow up to her successful 2022 album, SOS, was leaked to online platforms.
The Grammy award winning artist retaliated, “This is my job. This is my life and my intellectual property. You are a f— thief and I promise to put maximum energy into holding everyone accountable to the full extent of the law.”
As a means of creative expression, the unauthorised release of music evokes strong emotion and holds significant meaning for the artists who put their heart and soul into their music. During the same year, Central Cee surprised his fanbase of supporters when he released his aptly titled EP, No More Leaks, alongside the lead single “One Up”, noting that he only released the song because it had already been leaked. Instead of letting potential leakers take away his momentum at the final hour, Cench used the hype generated by the surprise drop to his advantage by releasing his work early.
On the flip side, there are artists who embrace leaks and even engage in self-leaks. A deliberate leak is a strategy sometimes adopted by labels and artists to create advanced hype for a release or to collect feedback from the public while developing the sound of a project.
In 2018, Kodak Black released a snippet of him dancing to the “ZeZe” instrumental in the recording booth. The video became an instant meme and the song a viral hit. By the time the full song was released a month later, the original clip had already been circulated widely online and the song swiftly gained traction, surmounting 40 million streams on Spotify alone.
In such instances, self-leaks can be used as a way to create hype for artists and musicians when releasing music to their fanbase and wider public on their own terms. In instances where an artist chooses to leak their music, it is often pre-agreed with their record labels to scrap the timeline and to bring forward the release.
Other times, an artist may decide to leak their music in an attempt of rebellion against a restrictive record label. Where the self-leak has not been sanctioned by the record labels, the consequences for the artists can be severe. Californian hip-hop group, Death Grip learnt this the hard way in 2010, when they were promptly dropped by Epic Records after they decided to release their album for free one month ahead of release, following a disagreement with the record label on projected release timelines.
However, the strategy of self-leaks is far from universal. It is clear from the above that SZA, like many others who suffer from music leaks, would like to see the perpetrators of such unauthorised releases pay a hefty price for their crimes. But what are the legal consequences? Let’s talk about it.
Legal consequences of music leaks
Intellectual property (IP) is a branch of law that focuses on protecting the expression of ideas, which are considered to be the property of the owner. There are four main types of IP: trademark, patent, copyright and trade secrets. In music law, copyright is the most significant type of IP. It also applies to other forms of literary works, such as writing and other forms of artistic work. Copyright protection is automatic, which means that as soon as a piece of work is recorded or written, it is automatically protected by copyright law.
Under UK legislation, owning the copyright to a song means having the exclusive right to allow or prevent others from using your work in various ways. It’s important to note that within a song, multiple copyrights can exist at any one time. The musical composition is protected by copyright law and covers the musical arrangement of the song, such as the melody. The lyrics are also protected by their own copyright, as is the produced sound recording of the song, which includes the actual musical performance.
Where a song has been produced under a record label, the copyrights for the song are often assigned to the label, with the artist receiving royalties. The assigned label, having copyright over that piece of music, has the right to prevent the unauthorised distribution of said music, i.e. a leak.
When considering leaks of songs, the copyright that is being infringed is the sound recording of the song. If the recording of the song is owned by a recording label, the ramifications of leaking a song, should a copyright owner wish to press charges, may be severe.
In accordance with UK legislation, the Digital Economy Act was introduced in 2017 to build on the UK’s existing copyright protection established by the Copyright Act 1976. Under the current law, an offence of piracy can carry a maximum prison sentence of ten years!
As a technical measure used for copyright protection to prevent unauthorised copying, sharing and distribution of content, Digital rights management (DRM) is a tool often employed by record labels incorporating access control technologies which use code to prohibit copying and restrict what users can do with content. In this way, DRM can provide a secure first line of defence for the copyright owner, when a song is played and when copies are produced. DRM can also help protect musical projects by making it easier to track and find leaks.
However, DRM can also have some disadvantages. For instance, Apple faced accusations of abusing and dominating their market share when it was uncovered that their DRM technology, “FairPlay” was giving the multinational tech company an unfair advantage. This was facilitated by issuing software updates which prevented music content being played or purchased from platforms which were not Apple-owned, contrary to its original purpose of preventing unauthorised copying and sharing of digital media.
FairPlay, initially seemed like a good deal for record labels to sell their music on iTunes, which was only compatible with iPods. However, it soon became a source of contention when Apple, who had now obtained significant influence in the music industry due to the popularity of their iPods, started to override record label decisions on the price and profit margins of the music being sold. As a consequence, consumers found themselves locked into the “Apple-only” ecosystem despite the growing range of choice in the digital streaming age.
Even with the adopted use of Digital Rights Management, leaks of copyrighted material may still occur, negatively impacting the artist and/or their recording label. Leaks can cause delays to a project’s timeline or even discourage artists from releasing their work.
In 2023, Kanye West sued an Instagram user (@DaUnreleaseGod_) for unauthorised distribution between March and August of the same year of various musical compositions created by West. The lawsuit, for misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of copyright, alleged that Kanye suffered significant financial loss as a direct consequence of the leak. According to the court documents, the unauthorised uploading of the songs onto the internet was the same as revealing a trade secret.
“Ye’s musical composition, with its original arrangement and unique elements, is a trade secret because it has economic value, confidentiality, and the measures taken to protect it,” the court documents remarked.
Should Kanye West’s lawsuit be successful, the courts will seek to impose a permanent injunction preventing the defendant (@DaUnreleaseGod_) from downloading, distributing, or otherwise exploiting West’s music.
Should you listen to leaks?
For diehard fans, the leaks of highly anticipated projects can cause a moral conundrum: is it ever right to stream illegal music?
As far as the law is concerned, there is nothing illegal about actually listening to leaked music, as long as you are not making money from it. Yet still, the argument persists.
On the one hand, it’s arguable that leaks are not really that harmful to an artist, and in fact are a testament to the excitement surrounding a show or insight into further music to be released. On the other, a leak can amass millions of views, which could result in lost streams and revenue that the artist would have gained had they released the music through official channels.
In extreme cases leaks can even result in the entire reworking of an album which can cause further delays. A$AP Rocky is a good example of this: his fourth studio album, Don’t Be Dumb, has been delayed despite originally hinting it would drop in August 2023, due to the team having to go back to square one each time the project leaks.
So, whilst many of us may have let curiosity get the better of us once or twice, for the sake of the artist’s musical integrity it’s probably best to wait for them to release it. On their terms!