As someone who’s chronically online, I’ve shamelessly added songs I discovered on TikTok to my playlist. All it takes is one clip to know if a song will become my newest hyper fixation. TikTok is how I’ve found some of my favorite artists, like Clairo and Tate McRae, who’ve evolved from livestreamed bedroom sessions to GRAMMY nominations. It’s also how I stumbled upon “I Run” by HAVEN.
The addicting house hit climbed Spotify’s U.S. Viral 50 chart and was poised to reach Billboard’s Hot 100 shortly following its original release on Oct. 29. Yet the rising single was suddenly removed from Spotify, Apple Music, and other major streaming platforms before it ascended any further.
How Did AI Get Involved?
Before “I Run” was taken off streaming platforms, rumors sparked on TikTok about alleged artificial intelligence (AI) usage regarding the song’s vocal production. The track featured an unnamed singer whose voice strongly resembled that of British R&B musician Jorja Smith. Speculation grew as the creative team behind HAVEN didn’t credit a female singer. The only known contributors are British EDM producers Harrison Walker and Jacob Donaghue, who’s also known as Waypoint.
Eventually, the allegations of dishonest production were confirmed as Walker and Donaghue told Billboard that “AI-assisted vocal processing” via an AI generative music tool, called Suno, was used to transform Walker’s vocals into a female-sounding tone. The product of Walker’s prompt on Suno was a voice that was coincidentally similar to Jorja Smith’s, according to HAVEN.
Smith’s record label, FAMM, released its own statement explaining that the artist’s “name and likeness” were used to promote the track and imply that it was an unreleased Jorja Smith song to boost social media interaction. Capitalizing on Smith’s previously established fanbase, FAMM argues that HAVEN might’ve gone as far as using Smith’s discography to train AI to produce the lyrics and melody of “I Run.”
This claim could be valid, as Suno pools all accessible music files “of reasonable quality” to train its AI model. In fact, Suno was entangled in a complex copyright infringement lawsuit before Warner Music Group reached a settlement with the AI company on Nov. 25. Prior to the agreement, Suno was accused of enabling users to “rip off” the style and lyrics of popular artists, ranging from Frank Sinatra to Ed Sheeran.
Even though users are prohibited from explicitly naming the artist they want to replicate, they could input highly specific prompts without naming the creator directly and generate suspiciously similar-sounding results. Now with the settlement, Suno must provide artists “full control” over how their lyrics, vocals, style, composition, names, and likeness are used by the AI platform if they choose to opt in.
Can “I Run” Still Be Streamed?
On Nov. 21, right before Warner Music Group released its settlement with Suno, HAVEN re-released “I Run” on major streaming platforms, featuring a 100% human artist named Kaitlin Aragon. She went viral on TikTok after posting a cover of “I Run,” which furthered confusion on the identity of the track’s main vocalist.
With over 15 million views on TikTok due to Aragon’s strikingly similar rendition of the original’s AI vocals, she announced she “got the song back on Spotify” since she collaborated with HAVEN to re-release the hit, but now with purely her voice.
While HAVEN’s growing fanbase was relieved to re-add their new favorite back to their playlists, the music industry is left in controversy as the success of “I Run” marks an uncharted frontier that several other creative spaces have struggled with: AI usage.
What Does the Success of “I Run” Mean for the Future of Music?
Utilizing tools powered by AI has been a growing concern for countless industries as models continue to evolve and advance their skillset. In both academic and creative industries, copyright infringement has been the main source of contention, as some believe AI use should be completely prohibited, while others disagree on how AI could be used. Can AI be a tool to help create the final piece? If so, how and to what degree?
Suno clarifies that users with the Pro or Premiere plan retain the rights to ownership of their creations and are granted commercial use and the right to monetize their AI-generated products. BROKE Records, representing HAVEN, have filed counter notices in response to the takedown notices issued by major streaming platforms.
The New York City-founded record label implied that HAVEN is entitled to the full rights of its original song and wouldn’t be facing widespread backlash for AI processing if it were signed to a more prominent label.
Smith’s record label, FAMM, offered another perspective on this narrative as its statement reveals that Smith was asked if she wanted to work with HAVEN to create a remix of “I Run” following the AI allegations. FAMM contextualized Smith’s decision not to make the remix since the label pointed out that HAVEN failed to mention its AI usage in the original version when requesting Smith for a remix.
If it weren’t for the public catching the suspiciously generated vocals of “I Run,” HAVEN would have entirely benefited from the track’s success without considering fair compensation and credit for the creators indirectly involved, according to FAMM.
This argument plays into the wider debate over AI in creative spaces since it takes a village to produce complex pieces, like songs. Fairly compensating these large teams is already complicated with royalties, splits, and contracts. Adding AI to the mix further convolutes where credit and compensation are due.
AI also undermines the decades of experience and unique styles that artists have cultivated. Plugging in already-made pieces into an algorithm and having that program spit out a hybrid of other people’s work defeats the creativity that makes art 100% human.
Want to see more HCFSU? Be sure to follow us on Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, YouTube, and Pinterest!