Although it bears your name, I doubt it’s truly you: The rise of AI impersonating artists on Spotify

Jason Moran, a distinguished jazz composer and pianist, received an unusual phone call from a friend last month. The friend, bassist Burniss Earl Travis, was intrigued by Moran’s new record he noticed on the music streaming service Spotify.

“It has your name on it,” Travis informed him. “But I don’t think it’s you.”

Moran clarified that he doesn’t utilize Spotify or distribute his music through the platform, as he opts only for Bandcamp. Thus, Travis’s claim raised concerns. After some fact-finding, Moran discovered a profile bearing his name on Spotify, filled with albums from his former label, Blue Note Records, which holds rights to his early works. Among these, there was a mysterious EP titled For You, featuring a moody Japanese anime-style album cover that illustrated a young woman seated on the ground under the rain. Intrigued, he decided to give it a listen.

“There’s not even a piano player on this whole damn record,” Moran chuckled. Describing the music as indie pop, he remarked: “It wasn’t even remotely close to anything I would make.” His next step was to request the removal of the fraudulent album.

Moran is part of an increasing number of musicians targeted on streaming platforms by apparent AI bots impersonating real artists. This incidence has affected several prominent jazz musicians, indie rock artists, and even noted rapper Drake. For those artists wrestling with this surge of AI-created content, the situation is incredibly frustrating, as Moran articulated. The experience feels surreal.

“It’s kinda like that Black Mirror episode with Salma Hayek,” he alluded, referencing a dystopian episode where a reality-show version of a character adversely influences the original’s life. “She doesn’t even have to be there in this episode; they’re just using a version of her.”

Spotify has acknowledged the proliferation of AI-generated junk on its platform, stating last September that it had removed over 75 million “spammy tracks” within the previous year. The company also announced enhancements to protections for musicians, which include more stringent regulations regarding impersonation.

Last month, Spotify mentioned in a blog post that it is developing a new tool designed to “give artists more control over what appears under their name.” It stated, “protecting artist identity” as a primary focus. This tool would allow artists to review and approve or reject releases before going live on the platform.

“Spotify employs a variety of safeguards to protect artists, including systems that detect and prevent unauthorized content, human reviews, as well as reporting and takedown procedures,” a spokesperson for the company stated, emphasizing that Spotify is unique among streaming services in offering such a tool.

Yet, for Moran, who previously held the position of artistic director for jazz at the Kennedy Center, these measures feel inadequate, especially since AI-generated content is not consistently flagged, and the issue appears to be escalating. He’s particularly worried for artists like himself, who avoid Spotify, and for those musicians who have passed away.

“How does John Coltrane verify or Billie Holiday confirm that some new record isn’t a fake ‘1952 just-found concert from Paris’?” Moran queried. “They have no means to object…”

The Spotify representative replied that estates or rights holders for deceased artists can opt into the company’s new tool if they possess an account. For artists without accounts—alive or deceased—the spokesperson noted that Spotify would continue to utilize its internal detection and accountability systems.

‘AI has become an accelerant’

After Travis alerted Moran to the counterfeit For You album, Moran posted a video addressing the situation on his Instagram and Facebook profiles. He noted a flood of artists reaching out to him, expressing that they too had fallen prey to what seemed like AI-generated content. Many mentioned enduring this issue for several years.

In the realm of jazz alone, Moran revealed, impersonation by AI has impacted notable musicians such as pianist Benny Green, saxophonist Antonio Hart, drummer Nate Smith, the Australian band Hiatus Kaiyote, alongside vocalists Dee Dee Bridgewater, Jazzmeia Horn, and Freddy Cole, who is Nat King Cole’s brother.

“So, this phenomenon is now circulating, taking on the names of many significant artists,” Moran remarked. “Imagine if someone released a new album under Frank Ocean’s name. Trust me; people would stream it, even if it wasn’t from Frank Ocean.”

Last October, NPR reported that indie rock musicians Luke Temple and Uncle Tupelo had their accounts compromised by AI, along with the now-passed electro-pop artist Sophie and country artist Blaze Foley. In a curious episode in December, the Australian psych-rock band King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard removed their music from Spotify, only for an AI doppelgänger dubbed King Lizard Wizard to fill the gap with replica song titles and poorly imitated AI artwork.

Morgan Hayduk, co-CEO of Beatdapp, a company that specializes in fraud detection for music streaming, mentioned that this problem extends beyond Spotify; it also manifests on Apple Music, YouTube, and various other streaming platforms. His firm estimates that 5% to 10% of all streams in the industry are fraudulent, equivalent to losses of $1 billion to $2 billion annually.

This represents significant revenue that is not reaching legitimate artists, according to Hayduk: “It’s substantial for the industry and consequential for every artist and everyone supporting artists who derive a livelihood from their music.”

Recently, a man named Michael Smith pleaded guilty to committing fraud against music streaming platforms by inundating these services with thousands of AI-generated songs while using automated bots to artificially inflate their listen counts into the billions. Federal prosecutors disclosed that Smith reaped over $10 million in royalty payments throughout his seven-year scheme.

Hayduk remarked that while fraudulent streams have long plagued the industry, the advent of generative AI has accelerated this issue. Often, when music is streamed, creators earn only a few cents. However, the volume of plays can rapidly accumulate, especially with the help of AI, which enables malicious actors, like Smith, to generate a substantial volume of content swiftly—any songs removed can be swiftly replaced.

“AI has effectively become an accelerant,” he noted.

Onus on the artists

Once Moran identified the AI impostor on his account, he sought assistance from Spotify. Initially, this involved a dialogue with a chatbot, which eventually led to a discussion with a human representative. This person was able to validate Moran’s identity and submit a claim on his behalf.

Seventy-two hours later, Spotify informed Moran: “Great news! We’ve now removed ‘For You’ from your artist profile.”

Moran was relieved that the process was relatively smooth, yet it was time-consuming.

“They essentially allow it to remain there until an artist discovers it and investigates,” Moran pointed out. “This demand placed upon us is unfair in many respects.”

Occasionally, the bogus AI-generated songs closely resemble the musician’s style; at other times, they starkly contrast. Additionally, there are cases where albums from various artists unexpectedly appear on a musician’s page, a situation Moran also faced. Spotify mentions that this can occur due to metadata errors. Just days after removing For You, another unauthorized album, this one from the real avant-garde Belgian band Schntzl, unexpectedly appeared on Moran’s profile. That record has since been taken down.

However, weeks later, For You resurfaced—this time on YouTube, masquerading as an album by Moran while featuring the same moody anime artwork, indie pop sound, and track list that had appeared on Spotify. While it amassed only about 20 plays, it notably doesn’t present on Moran’s YouTube artist profile.

YouTube did not respond to an inquiry regarding the matter.

Adam Berkowitz, a PhD candidate at the University of Alabama who investigates AI and copyright law within the music realm, noted that it can be challenging for streaming services to automatically remove albums for potential copyright or impersonation infringements.

“It becomes somewhat convoluted, as it places the private sector in the position of enforcing laws. And that’s not the intended framework,” Berkowitz stated. “It should be the courts that enforce laws.” While most artists, including Moran, have no interest in pursuing litigation, it’s apparent that the courts would struggle to keep pace with such emerging concerns. Ultimately, Berkowitz suggested that the onus will likely remain on artists to monitor their profiles.

Moran strictly uploads his music to Bandcamp, where he appreciates the control it affords him regarding the content and its pricing, granting him greater autonomy as an independent musician. In the realm of improvisational jazz, Moran explained that the essence of making music isn’t solely about earning revenue from album sales; it’s fundamentally about creating art and making it accessible to the audience.

“One thing no one can ever charge for is the power of the songs,” he concluded.