Is it time for musicians to copyright their voices?
The rise of AI voice cloning is creating 'sonic doppelgängers' with startling accuracy, raising profound questions about identity, authenticity, and intellectual property. This isn't a future problem—it's happening now. To contribute to this vital discussion, I've recently submitted my academic paper, "The Sonic Doppelgänger: AI Voice Cloning and the Reconfiguration of Musical Identity in the African Soundscape," for publication. It delves into the unique risks and cultural implications for artists on the continent.
What are your thoughts on protecting vocal identity in the age of AI?
Let's discuss in the comments.
Dear Kipyegon Kirui Amon Your paper on sonic doppelgängers hits a crucial note about safeguarding artists’ vocal identities in the AI era. As cloning tools grow more convincing, treating voices like trademarks could give musicians stronger legal standing. A registry for original recordings or embedded digital watermarks might help verify authenticity and block unauthorized copies. Crafting a blend of copyright protections, contract clauses and AI-specific rights seems essential. I’m eager to explore concrete policies and tools that keep musicians in control of their own sound.
I also want an opinion on my current paper:
Article Comparative analysis on AI-driven human digital twin for per...
Three things to consider regarding copyright: 1. The exclusive right to control and benefit from your creative work. 2. Protection regarding your creative work is for a limited time (not infinite) 3. Your work must be in tangible form (and not abstract). That said, I believe that our voice is not the end, but a means to an end. You cannot copyright your voice (the means), but you certainly can copyright the creative work produced from your voice (the end).
- Badges
- Science topic