AI impersonator Replaces King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard on Spotify After Protest
Spotify is facing new scrutiny after an AI-generated impersonator of Australian prog-rock band King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard flooded the platform with unauthorized music, remaining undetected for months following the band’s deliberate removal of their catalog. The incident raises critical questions about copyright, artist protection, and the responsibilities of streaming services in the age of artificial intelligence.
In July, King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard publicly withdrew their music from Spotify as a protest against CEO Daniel Ek’s investments in an AI weapons company. Shortly thereafter, fans began noticing a new account, “King Lizard Wizard,” hosting songs with identical titles and lyrics to the band’s originals, alongside strikingly similar musical arrangements. This wasn’t an isolated incident, as reports indicated this was not the first instance of a fake Spotify account attempting to mimic the band.
Outraged fans quickly took to social media platforms like Reddit to voice their frustration, prompting King Gizzard to publicly address the issue. The AI-generated track titled “Rattlesnake” with identical lyrics to King Gizzard’s original song, promptly establishing a potential claim of copyright infringement regarding both the title and lyrics. Moreover, the similar sound of the AI-generated music raises the possibility of infringement on Gizzard’s original sound recording.
Though, a court would need to determine whether the AI track is a direct copy or merely a “sound-alike.” Legally, sound-alikes occupy a gray area. While they may evoke the style, arrangement, or “feel” of the original, the recording itself is technically new. The key question becomes: is the listener hearing a copy of the original song, or simply a copy of the band’s musical style? While style itself cannot be infringed, it can be a factor when determining damages.
parody or Infringement?
Some might argue that the AI-generated tracks could be considered “fair use” as a form of parody. However, genuine parody requires commentary or critique of the original work, a transformative nature, and the use of only what is necessary to convey that critique. Based on the available data, these criteria appear to have been unmet in the King Gizzard case.
False Association and Trademark Law
The use of a near-identical band name – “King Lizard Wizard” – creates a meaningful likelihood of consumer confusion regarding the source of the music. This confusion was exacerbated by Spotify’s reported recommendation of the AI tracks.
Under the US Lanham Act, which addresses unfair competition, a claim of “false association” could be applicable. To succeed, King Gizzard would need to demonstrate prior protectable trademark rights and prove that the similar mark is highly likely to cause consumer confusion.The creator of the AI tracks, and perhaps Spotify itself, would likely be named as defendants in such a claim.
Spotify’s Liability and “Safe Harbor” Protections
While copyright actions are typically enforced by rights holders, not regulators, the onus would be on King Gizzard to initiate legal proceedings. However, litigation is often expensive and time-consuming, with uncertain outcomes.
Given that Spotify has now removed the infringing account and states that no royalties were paid to the creator, a lawsuit is less likely. Moreover, Spotify is largely protected by US “safe harbor” laws, which limit liability when platforms remove infringing content after notification. This highlights the tension between platforms actively promoting AI-generated content through algorithms and maintaining a “passive host” defense.
As a Spotify representative stated, the platform “strictly prohibits any form of artist impersonation” and removed the content for violating its policies. In September,Spotify announced policy changes regarding spam,impersonation,and deception,but questions remain about how these amendments translate into tangible changes on the platform.
This incident serves as a stark warning to artists, many of whom now face the threat of their work being used to train and generate AI models without their consent. For fans, it’s a crucial reminder to support their favorite artists through official and direct channels.
