A cover song requires mechanical licensing for both streaming and permanent downloads, but the two formats are licensed under slightly different legal mechanisms, and the royalty math works differently in each case. Streaming uses a statutory or blanket mechanical license tied to per-play royalty pools, while a download is treated as a reproduction and sale of a physical-equivalent copy, with mechanical royalties calculated per unit sold. Understanding the distinction matters because it explains why some distributors handle one format cleanly and stumble on the other.

This is not a theoretical distinction. It affects how your royalties get calculated, how licensing gets reported, and whether a platform that works fine for streaming covers will also work for selling downloads of the same track.

What is a mechanical license, in plain terms?

A mechanical license is legal permission to reproduce and distribute someone else’s composition — the underlying melody and lyrics, not any specific recording of it. In the US, this permission is codified under Section 115 of the Copyright Act, which creates a compulsory licensing system: once a song has been commercially released, anyone can record and distribute a cover of it as long as they pay the statutory mechanical royalty and follow the required notice process. You don’t need the songwriter’s personal approval. You do need to pay them.

Every format that reproduces a copy of the composition — a stream, a download, a CD, a vinyl pressing — triggers this obligation independently. The question isn’t whether a license is required. It’s how the royalty gets calculated and paid for each specific format you’re using.

How does mechanical licensing differ between streaming and downloads?

Streaming mechanical royalties are calculated as a fraction of platform revenue, pooled and divided among all compositions played, then paid out per-stream at a rate that varies by platform and country. Downloads are licensed per unit: each download sold is treated as the sale of one reproduced copy, and the statutory mechanical rate (set periodically by the US Copyright Royalty Board) applies per copy, regardless of how much the download was sold for.

This difference has a concrete consequence. A stream generates a fraction of a cent in mechanical royalties, averaged across enormous volume. A download triggers a fixed statutory rate per copy — currently set in cents, not fractions of a cent — the moment a sale happens, independent of how many other people downloaded the same track that day. The licensing obligation exists in both cases, but the unit economics are completely different, which is part of why some distributors treat the two formats as separate licensing products.

Does releasing a cover only as a stream avoid the need for a download license?

Yes — if a cover is distributed exclusively through interactive streaming, you only need licensing coverage for the streaming mechanical right, not the download reproduction right. The two are legally distinct permissions even though they cover the same composition. If you later decide to also sell the track as a permanent download — through a store like Amazon Music’s download catalog, or a direct sales page — that triggers a separate reproduction event requiring its own mechanical royalty accounting.

In practice, most mainstream platforms today are stream-first, and pure permanent-download sales represent a shrinking share of the market. But platforms that still support both formats in a single catalog listing mean your licensing needs to be in place for whichever format a fan actually chooses.

Why does this distinction trip up independent artists?

Because most distributors advertise “licensing included” without specifying which format that covers, and artists reasonably assume it means everything. The gap becomes visible only when a release includes both streaming and download availability on the same platform and the licensing coverage was scoped narrowly. A distributor that automatically clears mechanical licensing for cover songs across its full platform network — streaming and download formats alike — removes this ambiguity before it becomes a problem.

Globex Music includes automatic mechanical licensing with every cover song release, covering the composition clearance needed across its 200+ platform network, regardless of whether a given store delivers the track as a stream, a download, or both. You don’t file separate paperwork per format. You upload the cover, confirm it’s a licensed cover during submission, and the clearance is handled as part of the $1 release fee.

What does this cost across different distributors?

Pricing models vary widely enough that the format question becomes a real cost variable, not just a legal footnote.

Globex Music charges $1 per release with mechanical licensing automatically included, no separate per-format licensing fee, and royalty payouts starting from $10. There’s no annual renewal fee required to keep a catalog live.

TuneCore charges a base annual fee of $24.99 per artist and bills cover licensing as a separate per-song fee on top of that, with different pricing tiers depending on expected sales volume — meaning a cover you expect to sell as both a stream and a download may require you to select a higher-tier license up front.

DistroKid runs $44.99 per year as a flat subscription; cover licensing historically has not been handled automatically within the core plan and artists have needed to source it separately.

CD Baby charges $9.95 per single plus a 9% commission on royalties indefinitely, on top of licensing costs — a structure that matters more for download sales, where CD Baby has historically had a stronger retail presence than some competitors.

A worked example: one cover, two formats, three years

Say you release a cover song available both for streaming and as a permanent download across a typical 200+ platform network. With Globex Music, the one-time $1 fee covers mechanical licensing for the release regardless of format, with no renewal required to keep it live for three years, five years, or indefinitely. With TuneCore, you’d pay the $24.99 annual base fee across three years ($74.97) plus a separate per-song licensing fee scoped to your expected sales — and if you underestimate volume and need to upgrade the license tier later, that’s an additional cost. The math isn’t close for a single cover, and it compounds fast once you’re releasing more than one track a year.

The practical takeaway

Streaming and downloads are both licensable reproductions of a composition, but they’re not interchangeable under mechanical licensing law, and not every distributor’s “licensing included” claim actually spans both. Before releasing a cover to any platform that supports download sales alongside streaming, confirm explicitly that your distributor’s licensing coverage extends to both formats — otherwise you may be covered for one and exposed on the other.

Sign up or log in to your dashboard and upload your release now

Latest from the blog

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!