{"id":445,"date":"2024-04-30T09:51:54","date_gmt":"2024-04-30T09:51:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/tupacs-estate-threatens-to-sue-drake-over-ai-generated-fake-vocals\/"},"modified":"2024-04-30T09:51:54","modified_gmt":"2024-04-30T09:51:54","slug":"tupacs-estate-threatens-to-sue-drake-over-ai-generated-fake-vocals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/tupacs-estate-threatens-to-sue-drake-over-ai-generated-fake-vocals\/","title":{"rendered":"Tupac’s Estate Threatens To Sue Drake Over AI-Generated Fake Vocals"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

\n\tTupac Shakur\u2019s estate is threatening to sue Drake over a recent diss track against Kendrick Lamar that featured an AI-generated version of the late rapper\u2019s voice, calling it a \u201ca flagrant violation\u201d of the law and a \u201cblatant abuse\u201d of his legacy.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn a Wednesday cease-and-desist letter obtained exclusively by Billboard<\/em>, litigator Howard King<\/strong> told Drake (Aubrey Drake Graham) that he must confirm that he will pull down his \u201cTaylor Made Freestyle\u201d in less than 24 hours or the estate would \u201cpursue all of its legal remedies\u201d against him.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThe Estate is deeply dismayed and disappointed by your unauthorized use of Tupac\u2019s voice and personality,\u201d King wrote in the letter. \u201cNot only is the record a flagrant violation of Tupac\u2019s publicity and the estate\u2019s legal rights, it is also a blatant abuse of the legacy of one of the greatest hip-hop artists of all time. The Estate would never have given its approval for this use.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tDrake released \u201cTaylor Made\u201d on Friday, marking the latest chapter in a back-and-forth war of words between the Canadian rapper and Lamar. Beyond taking shots at both Kendrick and Taylor Swift, the track made headlines because of its prominent use of artificial intelligence technology to create fake verses from Tupac and Snoop Dogg \u2013 two West Coast legends idolized by the LA-based Lamar.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cKendrick, we need ya, the West Coast savior\/ Engraving your name in some hip-hop history,\u201d the AI-generated Tupac raps in Drake\u2019s song. \u201cIf you deal with this viciously\/ You seem a little nervous about all the publicity.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIn Tuesday\u2019s letter, Tupac\u2019s estate warned Drake that the use of his voice clearly violated Tupac\u2019s so-called publicity rights \u2013 the legal power to control how your image or likeness is used by others. And they took particular exception to the use of his voice to take shots at Lamar.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThe unauthorized, equally dismaying use of Tupac\u2019s voice against Kendrick Lamar, a good friend to the Estate who has given nothing but respect to Tupac and his legacy publicly and privately, compounds the insult,\u201d King wrote.<\/p>\n

\n\tA rep for Drake declined to comment on the demands of the Shakur estate.<\/p>\n

\n\tIt\u2019s unclear if Snoop Dogg<\/a>, whose voice was also featured on \u201cTaylor Made,\u201d is planning to raise similar legal objections to Drake\u2019s track. On Saturday, he posted a video to social media in which he seemed to be learning of the song for the first time: \u201cThey did what? When? How? Are you sure?\u201d A rep for Snoop Dogg did not return a request for comment.<\/p>\n

\n\tThe unauthorized use of voice cloning technology has become one of the music industry\u2019s thorniest legal subjects, as AI-powered tools have made easier than ever to convincingly mimic real artists.<\/p>\n

\n\tThe issue exploded onto the scene last year, when an unknown artist named Ghostwriter released a track called \u201cHeart On My Sleeve\u201d that featured \u2013 ironically \u2013 fake verses from Drake\u2019s voice. Since then, as voice-cloning has proliferated on the internet, industry groups, legal experts and lawmakers have wrangled over how best to crack down on it.<\/p>\n

\n\tIt\u2019s not as simple as it might seem. Federal copyrights are difficult to directly apply, since cloned vocals usually feature new words and music that are distinct from existing copyrighted songs. The publicity rights cited by the estate are a better fit because they protect someone\u2019s likeness itself, but they have historically been used more often to sue over advertisements and other commercial uses, rather than over creative works like songs.<\/p>\n

\n\tFaced with that legal uncertainty, the recording industry and top artists have pushed for new legislation to address the problem. Last month, Tennessee passed a statute called the ELVIS Act that aims to crack down on voice cloning by expanding the state\u2019s publicity right laws beyond just advertisements. Lawmakers in Washington DC are also considering similar bills that would create new, broader publicity rights at a federal level.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn Wednesday\u2019s letter, however, the estate said that California\u2019s existing publicity right laws clearly outlaw something as blatant as Drake\u2019s use of Tupac\u2019s voice in \u201cTaylor Made.\u201d King argued that the song had caused \u201csubstantial economic and reputational harm\u201d by creating the \u201cfalse impression that the estate and Tupac promote or endorse the lyrics for the sound-alike.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe estate also argued that the song was likely created using an AI model that violated the estate\u2019s copyrights by \u201ctraining\u201d on existing recordings of Tupac\u2019s music. The legality of using copyrighted \u201cinputs\u201d is another difficult legal issue that\u2019s currently being tested in several closely-watched lawsuits against AI developers, including one filed by major music publishers.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cIt is hard to believe that [Tupac\u2019s record label]\u2019s intellectual property was not scraped to create the fake Tupac AI on the Record,\u201d King wrote, before demanding that Drake also provide \u201ca detailed explanation for how the sound-alike was created and the persons or company that created it, including all recordings and other data \u2018scraped\u2019 or used.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tWednesday\u2019s letter also pointedly highlighted that Drake himself has made previous objections to the use of his own likeness by others. In addition to last year\u2019s incident surrounding \u201cHeart on My Sleeve\u201d \u2014 which was quickly pulled down from the internet \u2014 King pointed to a lesser-known federal lawsuit in which Drake\u2019s attorneys accused a website of using his image without authorization.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThe [\u201cTaylor Made Freestyle\u201d] has generated well more than one million streams at this point and has been widely reported in the general national press and popular entertainment websites and publications,\u201d the estate wrote. \u201cWithout question, it is exponentially more serious and damaging than a picture of you with some other people on a low volume website.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIn its closing paragraphs, the letter demanded written confirmation by noon Pacific on Thursday that Drake\u2019s representatives were \u201cexpeditiously taking all steps necessary to have it removed.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cIf you comply, the estate will consider whether an informal negotiation to resolve this matter makes sense,\u201d King wrote. \u201cIf you do not comply, our client has authorized this firm to pursue all of its legal remedies including, but not limited to, an action for violation of \u2026 the estate\u2019s copyright, publicity and personality rights and the resulting damages, injunctive relief, and punitive damages and attorneys\u2019 fees.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Tupac Shakur\u2019s estate is threatening to sue Drake over a recent diss track against Kendrick Lamar that featured an AI-generated version of the late rapper\u2019s voice, calling it […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":446,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[442,441,70,443,440,439,438,444],"class_list":["post-445","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lawyers","tag-aigenerated","tag-drake","tag-estate","tag-fake","tag-sue","tag-threatens","tag-tupacs","tag-vocals"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/445","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=445"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/445\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/446"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=445"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}