Taylor Swift is stepping up the legal war on AI copycats

Taylor Swift has been at the center of AI imitation controversies for years, and now, she’s become the latest celebrity who’s escalating attempts to protect herself from AI copycats. As usual, however, the legal system intersects with technology in complicated ways — and Swift’s efforts may be a long shot.

Taylor Swift is stepping up the legal war on AI copycats

Trademark applications filed by Taylor Swift could serve as another legal tool to combat AI fakes. In trademark applications filed last week, Swift’s team asked for protection for two phrases spoken by the singer: “Hey, it’s Taylor Swift” and “Hey, it’s Taylor.” The trademark applications, filed by TAS Rights Management on behalf of Swift, include audio clips of Swift saying the two phrases as part of a promotion for her latest album.

TAS Rights Management filed a trademark application for a photo of Swift as well, which shows the musician “holding a pink guitar, with a black strap and wearing a multi-colored iridescent bodysuit with silver boots” on stage. Though Swift’s team hasn’t said that the trademarks are meant to protect against AI misuse, it seems like a likely possibility given Swift’s history with AI. Not only has the star had to deal with the threat of AI music, but Swift also contended with an onslaught of sexualized AI deepfakes.

Artists have long used copyright law to protect their music, but the rise of AI-generated tracks has made defending their work and likenesses more difficult. That’s because copyrights only protect an artist’s song — not their voice. Legal teams have had to get a bit creative as a result, with Universal Music Group (UMG) issuing copyright takedown requests of an AI-generated Drake song, citing the Metro Boomin producer tag that plays at the beginning.

As explained by IP attorney Josh Gerben, trademarks could help fill the gap created by AI-generated mimicry. Instead of targeting exact copies of her music, Swift “could potentially challenge not only identical reproductions, but also imitations that are ‘confusingly similar,’” according to Gerben. The photo of Swift, similarly, could be potentially used to take action against similar AI-generated imagery.

But Alexandra Roberts, a professor of law and media at Northeastern University, tells The Verge that she’s “skeptical” that the audio clip submitted by Swift’s team “demonstrates use as a mark, rather than just a phrase that’s included as part of a longer message.” Typically for a soundmark we’d think of something like the NBC chimes or the MGM lion roar.

Xiyin Tang, a law professor at UCLA, suggests that trademarks could help “warn off unsophisticated infringers by directing them to a federal registration number and certificate of registration and hope that convinces them to stop.”

So far, only Tennessee has passed a law that specifically addresses AI-generated copycats of an artist’s voice. In the absence of a larger framework for AI soundalikes, artists like Swift may hope trademark law will help defend against AI mimics that are coming not just for their faces, but their voices, too.