The following text field filters the results that follow as you type.
We polled our LinkedIn audience to ask what they see as the greatest risks for musicians and entertainers. The results point to a growing need in the industry for targeted coverage to address these all-too-frequent pitfalls.
Published on July 16, 2026
7-minute read
Navigating business risk in music and entertainment
Lawsuits in music and entertainment aren’t new, but they are having a moment: blockbuster litigation have made headlines featuring high-profile artists from around the world. These cases highlight the risks that artists encounter while growing their career but can also obfuscate the challenges early career and up-and-coming artists may face. Our recent LinkedIn poll asked our audience to consider where creators are most exposed, and the results highlight what makes entertainment such a risky business.
The top concern: Trademark and copyright issues
The clear risk forerunner from our poll is trademark and copyright issues, with over half of our respondents (52%) choosing that as a top concern. With major musical artists regularly litigating trademark and copyright disputes, it’s easy to see why this was top-of-mind for our respondents. Still, new technologies and updated laws are stress-testing a musician’s reasonable response to these accusations.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 helped bring copyright law to the internet age, but cases like Capitol Records, Inc. v. MP3tunes, LLC highlight how nuanced these exposures have become. The thornier problems of AI-generated music and who owns a remix often go unconsidered by artists—and, in certain cases, are still being decided on by the courts. Combined with the greater visibility that comes from faster sharing across multiple platforms, the potential exposures begin to pile up. Artists advocating for themselves must contend with this new reality and its associated pitfalls.
52% of insurance professionals polled identified trademark and copyright issues as the greatest risk facing musicians and entertainers today.
A significant second: Social media use
About one in five poll participants (20%) recognized social media use as a major exposure for musicians and entertainers. Ranging from unintentional defamation or miscommunication to extended copyright disputes, social media surfaces risks for artists of all levels. The nature of social media and the rapid amplification of content beyond its context can place musicians and entertainers in difficult situations before they can recognize the damage. Diligent artists may do their best to mitigate the risk, but they can’t control it all.
One notable example that illustrates this type of exposure is the recent lawsuit against fashion brand Quince by music companies Universal Music Group (UMG) and Concord. These two companies struck licensing deals with social media platforms allowing individuals to use copyrighted music in their posts. Those deals don’t cover brands and businesses, though, and the music companies sued Quince, claiming willful infringement through its partnerships with influencers on TikTok and Instagram. As of writing, UMG and Concord are seeking statutory damages up to $150,000 per infringement. This is just one example in a larger pattern, with Sony Music and Warner Music Group having sued brands in prior years over similar claims. Artists seeking to expand their fanbases need to understand the double-edged nature of social media, as well as what a rights holder might do when their copyrights have been infringed upon.
A notable exposure: Contract disputes
Nearly tied with social media use (19%), contract disputes were also flagged as a major exposure for musicians. It’s easy to understand why: the scrutiny under which artists work is often a major consideration, as well as their ability to produce more and make more money (for both the artist and the label). The scope of these contracts and the associated expectations are often unique to the context—and can cut in both directions.
A recent example out of South Korea concerned K-pop group NewJeans trying to break their contract with record label ADOR. NewJeans claimed that the removal of ADOR’s co-founder and CEO Min Hee-jin created a “managerial vacuum” that impacted the trust necessary to work under an exclusive contract. The court found that this did not render ADOR incapable of fulfilling its contractual obligation, while other claims of leaked training videos and harassment from ADOR’s parent company, HYBE, were also dismissed as not constituting contract breaches. The ruling also approved indirect compulsory execution measures, where members of NewJeans would be required to pay ₩1B per violation if they “engaged in entertainment activities without company approval.” The decision resulted in a fracturing of the group, with one member’s contract terminated outright before ADOR sued her and others for ₩43.1B in damages from the years-long case. This case underlines the complexity artists face when reviewing (and potentially breaking) contracts with their record labels and management.
Social media, IP disputes and contracts can create unexpected exposures for entertainers.
Professional negligence in entertainment
Though it was selected by fewer respondents than other exposures, professional negligence (14%) can still be costly to musicians and entertainers. Potential risks span recording sessions, touring and more, with mistakes often costing the artist more than anticipated. Proper management and production can provide necessary care for an artist to continue creating and growing, and these theoretical hiccups or mistakes can affect more than just timelines.
Buried within Kesha’s complaints against songwriter-producer Dr. Luke is a salient example of the possible loss an artist may incur through professional negligence. While her case was being litigated, Kesha claimed that she required an injunction to prevent Dr. Luke from interfering with her signing to another label. Without it, according to her attorney, “She cannot work with music producers, publishers, or record labels to release new music. With no new music to perform, Kesha cannot tour … Her brand value has fallen, and unless the Court issues this injunction, Kesha will suffer irreparable harm.” This was supported in an affidavit from Jim Urie, president and CEO of UMG from 2003 to 2015, who said, “… if Kesha cannot immediately resume recording and having her music promoted, marketed, and distributed by a major label, her career is effectively over.” These invisible considerations impact artists of all types, which means that litigation can cost far more than lawyer fees.
As creative, branding and business risks continue to blur, artists need protection that goes beyond traditional coverage.
Why these risks are growing (and what artists can do)
The music industry is changing at a pace that can make it hard for independent artists to keep up. The blurred lines between creative output, branding and business obligations can prove exhaustive, while increasing scrutiny over digital content and intellectual property are still being litigated in the courts and leaving few answers for artists. Added to these concerns is the speed at which content is produced and shared, leaving little margin for error to sustain an artist’s livelihood.
Miscellaneous E&O coverage in the music and entertainment space is a proactive step that artists can take to help protect themselves against these exposures. Coverage for unintentional infringement and related disputes help address defense costs and resolution, while creators who provide services like recording, producing or engineering would benefit from protection against alleged mistakes or unmet obligations.
Our poll tells a clear story: artists are navigating more business risks than ever before and even established musicians and entertainers can fall prey to these claims. Miscellaneous E&O is a solution built to help protect work, income and reputation against drawn-out litigation and keep creators doing what they do best: creating.
