Paul McCartney's silent track: a powerful protest against AI in the music industry

Paul McCartney is making a statement in the music world with a track that is almost entirely silent.

The former Beatle is using this unusual approach to protest the use of AI in the music industry and the potential threat it poses to artists’ rights. 

The track will appear as a bonus on the upcoming vinyl edition of the album “Is This What We Want?” by UK artists, scheduled for release before the year-end. 

Rather than featuring the melodies or lyrics McCartney is known for, the song is a recording of an empty studio lasting two minutes and forty-five seconds. 

The only sounds are a few clicks and subtle studio noises. 

This release marks McCartney’s first new music in five years. His silent track is part of a broader protest album that features contributions from other artists, including Kate Bush, Sam Fender, Hans Zimmer, Pet Shop Boys, Damon Albarn, Annie Lennox, Tori Amos and Cat Stevens. 

The album is intended to raise awareness about proposed changes to copyright law in the United Kingdom that could make it easier for AI companies to use artists’ work without authorisation. 

In an interview with the BBC earlier this year, the 82-year-old expressed concern that the plans could, in the long run, remove the incentive for writers and artists to create new material, resulting in a "loss of creativity".

"You get young guys and girls coming up, and they write a beautiful song, and they don't own it, and they don't have anything to do with it. And anyone who wants can just rip it off."

"The truth is, the money's going somewhere… Somebody's getting paid, so why shouldn't it be the guy who sat down and wrote 'Yesterday'?"

He added: "If you're putting through a bill, make sure you protect the creative thinkers, the creative artists, or you're not going to have them."

Industry professionals have also raised concerns. Fisani Nyandeni, a former music executive, said, “AI is already part of the music industry, but there are almost no regulations. Questions about ownership and copyright remain unresolved. Artists need legal clarity to protect their voices, styles, and compositions.”

He also noted, “At the same time, AI could be a tool to protect music if used correctly. The focus should be on safeguarding human creativity.”

Recent examples highlight the problem. 

In 2023, a song was created using AI to mimic the voices of well-known artists, causing major controversy. Drake spoke out, saying, “My voice is mine. Using AI to copy it without consent crosses a line.” 

Record labels emphasised that AI-generated content using an artist’s likeness without permission violates copyright law and existing agreements with streaming platforms.

They argued that the music industry must choose whether it wants to support human creators or allow unauthorised reproductions.