When Your Voice Becomes an Asset: What Artists Need to Know About AI and Digital Replication By: Dr. Tara S. Merchant

Artificial intelligence is creating new opportunities for artists, but it is also raising important questions about ownership, consent and control.

For singers and recording artists, the conversation is no longer limited to who owns a master recording or a composition.

An artist’s voice, likeness, name and recognizable identity can potentially become valuable digital assets that may be replicated, altered or used in ways the artist never anticipated.

One of the most important issues artists should understand is the distinction between creating a recording and granting someone the ability to reproduce an artist’s identity.

A contract that addresses recordings, performances or promotional materials may not necessarily provide the protections an artist needs when artificial intelligence is involved.

Artists should carefully examine whether agreements permit the use of their voice, image, likeness or other identifying characteristics in connection with AI technologies, synthetic performances, digital replicas or training and development of AI systems.

The legal landscape surrounding these issues continues to develop.

Rights involving an artist’s identity may intersect with copyright, trademark, contract law and state right of publicity laws, which can vary significantly by jurisdiction.

Copyright, for example, generally protects original creative works, while the right of publicity can address certain unauthorized commercial uses of a person's name, likeness or other identifying characteristics.

These protections do not always provide a simple answer when technology creates something that sounds or looks like an artist without using an original recording or photograph.

For artists, this makes the language of their contracts increasingly important.

Before signing an agreement, artists should look closely at provisions involving artificial intelligence, digital replicas, synthetic voices, likeness rights, training data, derivative works, promotional uses and future technologies.

They should also consider whether the agreement specifies the duration and purpose of any such rights, whether additional compensation applies and whether the artist has any ability to approve, restrict or withdraw from particular uses.

Another important consideration is compensation.

If an artist's recognizable voice or likeness can be reproduced indefinitely, the economic value of that permission may extend well beyond the original recording session or performance. Artists should consider whether a contract adequately distinguishes between compensation for their actual performance and compensation for future digital uses of their identity.

The industry is still determining how existing laws and emerging legislation will address these questions.

That uncertainty makes it particularly important for artists to understand what they are granting before they sign.

Rather than assuming that a contract's broad language will protect them, artists should ask specific questions about how their identity may be used now and in the future.

The key takeaway is simple: artists should begin treating their voice and likeness as valuable intellectual and personal assets that deserve careful contractual protection.

Technology will continue to evolve, but an artist's ability to understand and negotiate the rights attached to their identity remains an important part of protecting their career and long-term interests.

Dr. Tara S. Merchant, J.D., provides legal commentary and information for educational purposes. This column does not constitute legal advice or establish an attorney-client relationship. Laws vary by jurisdiction, and readers should consult a qualified attorney regarding their individual circumstances.