We are opening submissions for our upcoming PTN Live Listening Session, and we pushed it one week to give everyone time to get through the holidays, get back into their flow, and breathe a little before we meet. This session is focused on music for visual media, so please read this before you send anything in. (Submission Info Below) We are looking to listen to cues/tracks that feel purpose-driven, structured, and built with a visual/picture in mind. Think arcs, scenes, Ads, trailers, moments, and pacing. Music that could live under a story. Your cue does not need to be perfect; it just needs intention. If it feels “almost ready” or you want clarity on whether it truly lands for film, TV, trailers, or branded media, this room is for you. Before you submit, ask yourself: • Does this cue move, or can it work in visual media/support Visuals? • Does it have a good structure, or is this something I need help with? • Can you hear it under a scene? • Does it have a Sting? What is a Sting? • Is the mix in a place where someone could judge the idea, or is it even "ready"? If ANY of this FITS, or you can use this help... send it. SUBMIT Via Email HERE - 👉🏼 listenlive@paintthenoise.com-- CUTOFF at 7 pm on TUESDAY - (12/09 ) We will go through the submissions and feature as many cues as we can within the session window. Wednesday night, 12/10, we listen. Bring your best.

Would anyone in the community be interested in doing live music reviews?

So our own, Nate, just dropped a great idea in the group and put up a POLL to raise interest in having an official - LIVE MUSIC REVIEW Live music review sessions. Real feedback. Real ears. Real growth. Not just “fire emoji” comments, but breakdowns that actually help you level up. Before we lock it in, we want to hear from you. PLEASE GO HERE --> https://www.skool.com/ptn-pulse-6707/music-reviews?p=fcd4d546 to participate and make this a Scheduled THING for this space!! ✅ Do you want this? ✅ Would you submit your own tracks? ✅ Would you join as a listener, reviewer, or both? TRUST that this could lead to some Interesting Outcomes in our Circles! The poll is up now. Go vote and drop a comment if you have ideas on format, genre focus, or what would make this most valuable for you. This only happens if the community wants it. So if you are in, speak up. Let’s build what creators actually need, not what the industry thinks we need.

Another for the day! This one had to get up and in attention.. 📍 SIGNAL Universal Music Group (UMG) has settled its copyright-infringement lawsuit with AI-music platform Udio, resolving accumulated claims that Udio trained its AI models on UMG’s recordings without authorization. (Reuters) Under the agreement, UMG and Udio will collaborate on a new AI-powered creation and streaming service launching in 2026, one that uses licensed recordings and publishing assets, not unlicensed scraping. (UMG) For creators: This is the first big publicly-announced case where a major rights-holder is treated as a training-data licensor. Your catalogue may now count as a paid input, not just free fodder. - 📂 PATTERN The industry has seen a cascade of lawsuits: artists vs. tech; labels vs. AI startups; now rights-holders vs. the training-data supply chain. UMG’s settlement with Udio marks the movement from defense to proactive licensing. (Music Business Worldwide) - 🚨 PRESSURE POINTS - Artist consent: The agreement mentions opt-in for UMG artists and songwriters — what about independent creators? (Pitchfork) - Platform restrictions: Udio’s current product will shift to a “walled garden” where generated songs can’t be freely downloaded — users are unhappy. (AP News) - Financial opacity: Terms of compensation are undisclosed — we don’t yet know how writers will share in this new model. (Music Business Worldwide)

📍 SIGNAL Denmark’s rights group Koda has filed a major lawsuit against AI-music startup Suno, claiming it trained its model on thousands of Danish works, from pop acts like MØ and Aqua to film composers, without consent or compensation. For creators, this isn’t abstract. It means songs you wrote, released, or uploaded could have been scraped to “teach” an algorithm how to mimic human composition. Koda says Suno didn’t ask, didn’t pay, and now generates outputs that echo its members’ styles. The case pushes Europe into the same legal territory the US majors opened when they sued Suno and Udio earlier this year - but with a songwriter-first angle, not just label protection. - 📂 PATTERN Every month, another AI-music lawsuit drops, but the fight keeps widening. First, it was artists vs. tech. Then labels vs. startups. Now it’s collective rights organizations vs. AI models. The music industry’s entire rights structure is being redrawn line by line, lawsuit by lawsuit. - 🚨 PRESSURE POINTS (PROBLEMS BEING OVERLOOKED) -No creator opt-out. Most writers don’t even know when or how their works are being scraped. -Training data opacity. Platforms claim “proprietary datasets,” shielding what they used and where it came from. -Royalty black hole. Even if settlements happen, who gets paid - publishers, PROs, or individual writers - is unclear. -Cultural erosion. If models learn from global catalogs, local sounds risk being flattened into generic, algorithm-friendly templates. - ⚖️ CULTURE CHECK - FOR OR AGAINST CREATORS? Right now, this fight leans against. AI tools move faster than legal frameworks, and creators are reacting, not shaping policy. Until rights groups get proactive about licensing terms for training data, the creative economy stays reactive, not sovereign. - 📈 SYSTEM MOVE Koda’s case could become the first to define “AI-training royalties” as a new income stream. If successful, European law could force AI platforms to pay into a central fund, distributed to songwriters the way performance or mechanical royalties are today. That precedent would ripple worldwide.