London, December 01, 2025
Jorja Smith’s record label has criticized the use of AI-generated vocals in the viral dance track “I Run” by producer HAVEN., leading to the song’s removal from Spotify amid allegations of unauthorized AI cloning of an artist’s voice.
The track “I Run” gained rapid popularity as a dance hit before scrutiny emerged over its vocal production. Accusations allege that the vocals were created using artificial intelligence technology to replicate the distinctive voice of an established singer without consent. This has sparked a dispute involving the record label and raised questions about the legitimacy of the track’s vocal content.
Following these developments, Spotify took down “I Run” from its streaming platform, signaling increasing platform enforcement against alleged unauthorized AI-generated music. This removal reflects the music industry’s growing vigilance over the use of AI voice cloning, especially where intellectual property rights and artist authorization are concerned.
Industry Concerns Over AI Voice Cloning
This incident underscores a rising challenge facing the music sector: the unauthorized employment of AI voice synthesis to mimic known artists. The technology’s capability to produce highly realistic vocal imitations has prompted serious debates about copyright infringement and creative authenticity. Artists and their representatives are increasingly voicing alarm over potential violations of their vocal identities without permission or compensation.
Moreover, questions are mounting about the responsibility of digital music platforms in moderating and verifying content to prevent the dissemination of synthetic vocal recordings created without proper clearances. The removal of “I Run” is an early example of platforms acting decisively amid regulatory and ethical uncertainties surrounding AI in music production.
Implications for Copyright and Artist Protection
The controversy involving “I Run” brings to light the urgent need for clear legal frameworks and industry standards addressing AI-generated music. Copyright law currently struggles to keep pace with technology that can replicate an artist’s voice, generating content that blurs lines between human performance and synthetic reproduction.
Stakeholders emphasize the importance of protecting artists’ rights to their vocal likenesses, ensuring that any use of AI to recreate voices follows authorized channels and fairly compensates the original artists. Without such protections, the proliferation of AI clones threatens the integrity and economic value of artistic performances.
As the music industry confronts these challenges, this high-profile case may serve as a precedent for how AI vocal imitation disputes are handled going forward, influencing policy formation, licensing practices, and platform compliance measures.
The removal of the “I Run” track marks a significant moment in the evolving interface among technology, copyright, and artistic integrity, highlighting the pressing need to address emerging risks associated with AI in creative content.