Drake’s AI-Assisted Diss Track Spurs Potential Legal Woes
Shakur Estate Threatens Drake With Legal Action Over Unauthorized Use of Tupac’s AI Voice
Canadian hip-hop superstar, Drake, could be facing some legal consequences following his recent jab at fellow rapper Kendrick Lamar. Not only is the feud causing ripples in the music scene, but it’s also caught the attention of the estate of the globally revered late rapper, Tupac Shakur. The estate is contemplating legal measures against Drake for using an AI-synthesized voice resembling Shakur’s in his latest diss track called “Taylor Made Freestyle.”
Legal Letter Delivered to Drake
The Huffpost reports that the representative of Shakur’s estate has given Drake 24 hours to remove the contentious song from his playlist. The AI voices of Shakur and Snoop Dogg were integrated in the diss track, encouraging Kendrick to retaliate. The track’s lyrics include AI Tupac stating, “You asked for the smoke, now it seems you’re too busy for the smoke.”
According to Billboard, an official cease-and-desist letter, penned by attorney Howard King, has been issued to the rapper, birth name Aubrey Graham. The letter condemns the unauthorized utilization of Tupac’s voice and the infringement on the estate’s legal rights. It severely criticises the track as an affront to Tupac’s legacy.
Snoop Dogg’s Response To Drake’s AI-Stunt
In response to the release of “Taylor Made Freestyle,” rapper Snoop Dogg expressed his bemusement via Instagram at the unsolicited use of an AI-duplicate of his voice. In the post, the visibly astounded rapper asks, “They did what? When? How?” before wishing his followers a good night.
We are eagerly waiting to see further developments of this dispute.
DPH Hot Take
As fascinating as artificial intelligence’s encroachment into the creative arts is, this story serves to highlight the complexities and ethical debates that arise when it comes to using AI to mimic deceased artists. It’s safe to say the endgame for AI in music is far from settled. While there’s potential for innovative new creations, it’s essential artists and those owning the rights of deceased artists navigate this new frontier with respect for the profound significance and individuality of each artist’s legacy. This issue is a stark reminder that there is still much to be decided in the legal world when it comes to AI, especially with regards to respecting the legacy and rights of artists, and will doubtless fuel ongoing conversations surrounding the ethics and use of artificial intelligence in the music industry.