Non-English Tours Reach 30% as Musicians Challenge AI-Licensing Payments
Global touring is becoming more multilingual, but the growth of artificial intelligence is creating new disputes over who shares in music-industry revenue.
Live Nation says non-English-speaking artists now account for 30% of its 50 largest tours—up from only 8% before the pandemic. Meanwhile, the American Federation of Musicians is pursuing a lawsuit alleging that Universal Music, Warner Records and Atlantic Recording licensed recordings featuring union musicians for commercial AI use without providing the required payment or notice.
Together, these developments highlight two important changes: regional-language artists have greater international touring potential, and music contracts must clearly explain how AI income will be shared.
Key Developments at a Glance
DevelopmentReported informationWhy it mattersGrowth of non-English toursNon-English-speaking acts represent 30% of Live Nation’s 50 largest toursInternational demand is no longer limited to English-language artistsArena infrastructure47 of 75 leading international touring markets reportedly lack sufficient modern arena infrastructureVenue availability could determine where the live-music business growsAFM lawsuitThe union alleges musicians were not paid or notified when recordings were licensed for AI useAI licensing income may not automatically reach performersCurrent legal statusThe labels have requested dismissal, and the court has not issued a final rulingThe allegations remain disputedHow Much Have Non-English Tours Grown?
Non-English-speaking artists now represent approximately 30% of Live Nation’s 50 largest tours, according to the company’s chief financial officer, Joe Berchtold.
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the figure was approximately 8%. This means the reported share has grown by almost four times.
Berchtold presented the figures during the Goldman Sachs Communacopia and Technology Conference on September 9, 2026. The statistics were subsequently reported by Digital Music News.
The data reflects the international growth of genres and music cultures including:
K-pop
Latin and reggaeton
Regional Mexican music
Afrobeats
Country music outside the United States
Other regional and local-language genres
These are company-reported figures rather than an independently audited analysis of the entire concert industry.
Why Are Non-English Artists Attracting Larger Audiences?
Streaming services and social platforms allow artists to develop audiences outside their home countries without first becoming successful in English-language markets.
An artist may now have concentrated groups of listeners across several cities. Individually, these audiences may appear small, but together they can support international concerts or regional tour dates.
Diaspora communities are particularly important. A regional-language artist may have strong demand in cities such as London, Berlin, Stockholm, Toronto, Los Angeles or Sydney, even without significant mainstream radio exposure.
For Kurdish artists and labels, the lesson is that language does not automatically prevent international touring. However, streaming popularity alone is not enough. Successful expansion also requires:
Reliable fan-location data
Suitable local promoters
Realistic venue selection
Strong diaspora marketing
Local ticket-pricing knowledge
Visa and travel planning
Coordinated release and touring campaigns
Why Does Live Nation Want More International Arenas?
Live Nation estimates that 47 of the 75 largest international touring markets lack sufficient modern arena infrastructure.
Cities mentioned in the discussion included Istanbul, Rome, Frankfurt, Seoul, Tokyo, Manila, São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Lima.
The company considers new arena development across Europe, Asia and Latin America a major source of future growth.
Modern arenas can attract larger international productions because they offer suitable capacity, staging systems, audience facilities and technical infrastructure. A lack of suitable venues can make a city difficult or expensive to include on a tour, even when audience demand exists.
However, expansion by global promoters can also increase concentration in the live-music market. Local promoters, independent venues and regional festivals may face stronger competition for artists, dates and sponsorship.
What Is the AFM’s AI-Licensing Lawsuit About?
The American Federation of Musicians has filed an opposition to attempts by Universal Music Group, Warner Records and Atlantic Recording Corporation to dismiss its lawsuit.
The union alleges that recordings featuring performances by its members were supplied for commercial use by AI music companies without the required payment or notice.
The dispute is connected to licensing arrangements involving AI platforms Suno and Udio. Warner reached settlements with both companies, while Universal reached an agreement with Udio.
The AFM claims its represented musicians did not share in relevant settlement or licensing proceeds. These allegations are explained in the detailed report from Music Business Worldwide.
The court has not ruled that the record companies breached their agreements.
What Is the “New Use” Provision?
The case centres on Article 21(a) of the Sound Recording Labor Agreement between the union and participating record companies.
The provision addresses the use of an existing recording for a purpose not otherwise covered by the agreement.
The AFM argues that supplying recordings to commercial AI systems qualifies as a new use and should trigger payment and notification obligations.
Universal has argued that the provision does not establish an independent payment rate. According to that interpretation, payment would depend on a separate AFM agreement covering the new type of use—and no specific agreement currently establishes a rate for AI.
The union responds that its interpretation is sufficiently plausible for the case to proceed and that the agreement’s notice requirement can exist independently of a specific AI rate.
Why Could This Case Affect the Wider Music Industry?
AI licensing agreements can generate money for companies that control master recordings, publishing rights or other catalogue assets. However, ownership or control of those rights does not necessarily resolve contractual obligations to performers.
A recording can involve several parties:
The master owner
The featured artist
Session musicians
Producers
Songwriters
Music publishers
Unions or collecting organisations
Each party may have different contractual rights. If AI use is not clearly addressed, income can reach one participant without automatically being shared with the others.
The AFM case could influence future negotiations over:
AI-training licences
Settlement proceeds
Artist and performer consent
Payment calculations
Notice requirements
Synthetic and derivative outputs
Auditing and reporting rights
The withdrawal of previously granted permission
What Should Artists, Labels and Producers Do?
Music agreements should define AI rights before a catalogue is licensed or uploaded to a generative system.
Important questions include:
Can the recording or composition be used to train an AI model?
Who has authority to approve that use?
Is permission opt-in or automatic?
Can an artist withdraw permission later?
How will compensation be calculated?
Will performers and session musicians receive a share?
Does the licence cover training only, or also generated outputs?
What reporting and auditing information must be provided?
Can an artist’s voice, name or identity be simulated?
How will AI income appear in royalty statements?
Labels should also preserve complete performer credits, session records, contracts and rights metadata. Without accurate documentation, it becomes more difficult to identify everyone entitled to payment.
What Do These Developments Mean for Regional Artists?
The touring figures create a positive opportunity: regional identity and local language can become international advantages when an artist develops a loyal, measurable audience.
The AI dispute provides a warning: commercial growth does not guarantee that every creator or performer will share fairly in the resulting income.
Regional artists and independent labels should therefore combine international ambition with careful rights management. Audience data can reveal where to tour, while accurate contracts and metadata can protect the income generated by recordings.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are 30% of all global tours now non-English?
No. The figure applies specifically to Live Nation’s 50 largest tours, according to the company’s CFO.
What was the reported percentage before the pandemic?
Approximately 8% of Live Nation’s top 50 tours involved non-English-speaking artists before the pandemic.
Which regions does Live Nation consider important for arena development?
The company highlighted opportunities across Europe, Asia and Latin America.
Has the AFM won its lawsuit?
No. The case is still developing, and the court has not issued a final decision on the union’s allegations.
Is Sony Music involved in this AFM case?
No. Sony Music is not a defendant in this particular lawsuit.
Do musicians automatically receive part of an AI licensing agreement?
Not necessarily. Payment depends on ownership, collective agreements and individual contracts. AI rights and revenue allocation should be stated explicitly.
Conclusion
The global music economy is expanding beyond traditional English-language markets, creating new touring opportunities for artists with strong regional and diaspora audiences.
At the same time, the AFM lawsuit demonstrates that new AI revenue can create disputes when agreements do not clearly define consent, payment and reporting.
The next phase of music-industry growth will therefore depend on two things: better international infrastructure for live performance and stronger contractual protection for everyone whose work contributes to recorded music.
