Jammable Faces Legal Heat from UK Music Industry for AI Voice Cloning

Published March 18, 2024

Recently, the vocal cloning application Jammable, which was previously known as Voicify.ai, has come under scrutiny from the music industry for allowing its users to duplicate the voices of well-known artists using AI technology without obtaining permission. With a library of around 3,000 artificial intelligence voice models, users can produce unauthorized 'deepfake' music, featuring the voices of celebrities such as Adele, Justin Bieber, and Eminem inserted into different musical tracks. This practice has caught the attention of the Record Industry Association of America (RIAA) and particularly the UK's British Phonographic Industry (BPI), which is now challenging Jammable's operations.

What is Jammable?

Jammable enables its subscribers to generate 'covers' by removing original vocals from existing songs and substituting them with AI-generated voices of different artists. As a result, it is possible to create tracks where, for example, a voice model of Ed Sheeran could be singing a Michael Jackson song. Users have various subscription options, ranging from a basic monthly plan to a premium service for 'power users'.

Legal Controversy Surrounding Jammable

The BPI has expressed concern over Jammable's activities, citing copyright infringement and damage to artists' right of publicity. This resulted in them sending a legal threat to the company, demanding an end to their alleged copyright-infringing activities. This move by the BPI is significant as it marks the first legal action against a 'deepfake' enabling service within the music industry.

Despite changing its name from Voicify to Jammable and making some changes to its functionalities, the service continues to provide access to cloned voice models, which has not satisfied the industry's call for action.

Industry and Legal Expert Reactions

Music executives and legal experts have decried Jammable's model as an unethical use of AI that jeopardizes the rights and earnings of original artists. Music industry entities, such as the Musicians' Union, Ivors Academy, and UK Music, have voiced their support for BPI's stance. Furthermore, copyright lawyers suggest that actions such as Jammable's could be regarded as breaches of data privacy laws and potential misuse of an artist's personal brand. They also emphasize the risks consumers face by using such services, primarily due to the lack of clarity on the legality of AI-generated content.

Implications for the Music Industry

The escalating dispute with Jammable comes at a time when copyright holders are increasingly vigilant about protecting their rights against the proliferation of AI tools. Lawsuits have been filed in various jurisdictions, and legislation such as the No AI FRAUD Act in the US and the AI Act in the European Union is in progress to offer greater protection against unauthorized AI-generated content.

Jammable, legal, copyright