Spotify’s CEO invests $1 billion into an AI military start-up — and musicians are fuming

The billionaire founder of Spotify is under extremely heavy fire over a controversial decision. For many, it was the final straw.

Spotify’s billionaire CEO Daniel Ek is under heavy fire from artists and industry advocates after announcing a €600 million (A$1.07 bn AUD) investment into Helsing, a military tech start-up developing AI tech for war.

Helsing, now valued at around €12 billion (A$19.5bn), builds AI-driven drones, submarines and aircraft and claims to “develop and deploy these technologies” to “protect fragile democracies”.

Ek’s investment, made via his firm Prima Materia, saw him aggressively double down on an earlier €100 million (A$162 million) pledge in 2021.

He now chairs the company.

But while Ek frames the move as a response to modern geopolitical challenges, many in the music world see it as a betrayal.

For an industry largely built around the idea of community and counterculture, the optics are damning.

“This is one of the many reasons I’m not releasing music on Spotify anymore,” said Charlie Waldren, the Sydney artist behind Poolroom. “People talk about ‘no war’ while paying $13.99 a month to a company whose boss is doing this, so they can listen to Royel Otis.

“I don’t want to fund war with my subscription.”

While one subscriber ditching the platform is inconsequential to the Spotify profit machine, Waldren hopes more of his peers get hip to the realities of the world’s biggest music streamer.

He has returned to releasing on Bandcamp, a website set up specifically with the artist in mind, where users can purchase music and merchandise directly from the uploader.

German electronic music producer Skee Mask also made headlines when he scrapped his entire discography from the platform, following Ek’s initial investment into Helsing.

“It’s done, all my s**t is gone from Spotify,” he wrote.

“My music will be available there again as soon as this company starts (somehow) becoming honest and respectful towards music makers.

But the United Musicians and Allied Workers (UMAW) organisation, a group advocating for artist rights, went even harder, claiming on X it looked like “warmongering” while artists are paid “poverty wages”.

“To build a fair and just music industry, we also must dismantle imperialism in all its forms.”

“We stand against genocide and against the war machine, and encourage artists to build solidarity across the world.”

Spotify’s billionaire CEO Daniel Ek is under fire from artists and industry advocates after announcing a €600 million (A$1.07 bn AUD) investment into Helsing, a military tech start-up developing AI software for warfare. / AFP PHOTO / TORU YAMANAKA

‘Our purpose is to attain technological leadership so that democratic societies are free to make sovereign decisions and control their ethical standards.’

‘Evil Music CEO’: Video

Popular music reviewer Anthony Fantano, known online as “The Needle Drop”, joined the chorus with a video published this week titled: “Evil Music CEO.”

“If you are at all familiar with the history of capitalism, you understand that the entertainment industry being mixed in, in some form or fashion, with some of the worst sectors of our economy. It’s nothing new. But it’s somehow worsening, thanks to Daniel Ek, CEO over at Spotify,” Fantano told his 2 million subscribers.

“Was music ever really a passion or a driver for him in any way whatsoever?” he asks in the video, while claiming he would now be involved in “tech designed to kill people”.

“This dude runs his company in a way where he’s paying artists poverty wages.”

Fantano said that anybody who truly cared about music as a cultural necessity would use at least some of the fortune they made from countless artists to inject some much-needed stimulus into areas that needed it most.

“Now, if that were me, and I had that much money in my pocket — sure, this doesn’t make me Jesus or anything — but you know, I would at least put some of that cash back into the music economy to maybe support the artists that are making my livelihood possible, consistently,” he said.

Popular music reviewer Anthony Fantano, also known as ‘The Needle Dro’, joined the chorus with a video published this week titled: ‘Evil Music CEO.’

Composer Pete Carroll echoed those sentiments on X, urging artists to boycott the platform.

“Take your human creative works off Spotify people. You’re supporting a (MAN) now involved with military AI,” he said.

Ek has been contacted for comment via Spotify.

Streaming is ‘poverty’ for artists

It’s all part of a broader pushback against major power brokers in the music industry.

Spotify has a chequered history and dubious reputation among grassroots musicians around the globe. The platform, which launched in 2008, has long faced criticism for what many say are razor-thin artist royalties.

Spotify’s convenience has won over millions of users around the globe. Because of its gargantuan user count, the appeal for artists is “exposure”.

But even if you listened to your favourite band on repeat all day, you’d barely be generating a dollar.

In 2024, Spotify’s average payout per stream ranged between $0.003 and $0.005 USD, which converts to approximately $0.0045 to $0.0075 AUD per stream. That rate can vary based on factors such as listener location, subscription type (free or premium), and the artist’s distribution agreement.

For a band of five to make the average wage in Australia purely off streaming payouts, they would need approximately 88.7 million hits annually, or about 7.4 million streams per month. That’s roughly the entire population of NSW playing your song at least once a month.

And that’s all before tax, of course. Because then comes the ATO and the industry’s obligatory deductions.

Spotify has a chequered history and dubious reputation among grassroots musicians around the globe. The platform, which launched in 2008, has long faced criticism for its razor-thin artist royalties. (Photo by Lionel BONAVENTURE / AFP)

Distributors, record labels and all manner of “necessary middlemen” often take a percentage of an artist’s revenue, which can significantly reduce the amount that reaches each musician.

For a pop star who does not write their own songs and builds wealth from exterior sponsorships, this is not a big deal. But for small acts that self-produce, the divvying up of meagre payouts is seen as criminal.

For example, an independent garage band must pay approximately $20 to a “distributor” before uploading their song to Spotify. It would then take that song around 10,000 streams a year to “pay” for itself.

Relying solely on Spotify streaming revenue to earn a crust has become a fruitless strategy for start-up projects, which has inevitably led some bands to flip the table.

Diversifying income streams through live performances, merchandise sales, and other platforms can provide more financial stability. But a quick glance at Australia’s collapsing festival circuit will tell you just how optimistic that sounds for working bands attempting to break through.

Let me know your Thoughts? [e-mail]

Originally published as Spotify’s CEO invests $1 billion into an AI military start-up — and musicians are fuming