Over 200 high-profile musicians spanning genres and eras have signed an open letter calling for protections against the unauthorized use of AI to mimic their likenesses, voices, and sound. The letter, issued by the Artist Rights Alliance advocacy group, demands technology companies pledge not to develop AI tools that undermine or replace human songwriters and artists. It argues such “predatory” use of AI “must be stopped” to protect creators’ rights and the music ecosystem, though it doesn’t call for a total AI ban in music, acknowledging potential benefits from responsible use.
The letter reflects growing pushback from artists and creators against generative AI over ethical and legal concerns like copyright infringement and labor rights. It criticizes companies for using artists’ work to train AI models without permission, which it says dilutes royalty pools. The letter comes amid rising commercial use of AI vocals and imagery, prompting lawsuits, union demands, and recent legislation in Tennessee prohibiting unauthorized replications of artists’ voices for commercial purposes.
The “Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security Act of 2024,” also known as the Elvis Act, has replaced the previous “Personal Rights Protection Act of 1984”, significantly enhancing protections over the commercial use of an individual’s personal attributes. Under the new law, individuals now possess a property right in the use of their voice, in addition to their name, photograph, and likeness. Any unauthorized commercial exploitation of a person’s voice, such as in advertising, fundraising, or soliciting purchases, without their consent or that of their legal representatives, is prohibited and subjects violators to civil liability.
The exclusive rights held by an individual’s executors, heirs, or assignees to commercially exploit these personal attributes no longer expire after a fixed 10-year window following the individual’s death. Instead, these rights persist indefinitely until there is a 2-year period of non-use. Crucially, the law has established liability for not just directly using an individual’s voice or likeness without authorization, but also for publishing, distributing, or making available algorithms, software, or other technologies specifically designed to produce a particular person’s voice, photograph, or likeness unlawfully. This addresses emerging capabilities in synthetic media generation.
While strengthening protections, the act outlines exemptions for fair use cases under First Amendment rights, such as news reporting, public affairs broadcasts, sports accounts, commentary, criticism, scholarship, satire, and parody. Fleeting, incidental, or self-representational uses in audiovisual works are also permitted unless creating a false impression of participation.
The liability standard has been shifted, making owners or employees of media platforms responsible if they reasonably should have known about unauthorized use of an individual’s personal attributes, rather than requiring actual knowledge.
Additionally, the law allows advertisements for certain protected works under fair use exemptions. Courts now have the power to grant injunctions on reasonable terms to prevent or restrain the unauthorized use of an individual’s voice, alongside existing provisions for name, photograph, and likeness.
If you’re wondering how Tennessee’s Elvis Act, or any other AI bill around the world, could impact you, don’t hesitate to reach out to BABL AI. Their Audit Experts are ready to provide valuable assistance while answering your questions and concerns.
