The record label representing acclaimed British singer Jorja Smith has formally demanded a share of royalties from a viral TikTok song, alleging it used an artificial intelligence-cloned version of her voice without authorisation.
The Viral Hit and Swift Takedown
The track in question, I Run by British dance act Haven, surged in popularity in October. It achieved significant chart positions, reaching No. 11 on the US Spotify chart and No. 25 globally, putting it on course for the UK and US official charts. However, streaming services subsequently removed the song following takedown notices issued by Smith's label, Famm.
The notices, supported by industry bodies the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), argued the song infringed copyright by impersonating Smith. They contended it misled listeners into believing it was an unreleased original by the artist, a confusion exacerbated by Haven's social media posts using the hashtag #jorjasmith.
AI Processing and Public Confusion
The uncredited, apparently female vocals on the original track were revealed to belong to the band's Harrison Walker, processed through the generative AI music tool Suno. "It shouldn't be any secret that I used AI-assisted processing to transform solely my voice for I Run," Walker told Billboard, describing his use of new tools as a songwriter.
Famm alleges that after the song went viral, Haven's team approached Smith to feature on an official remix, ostensibly to "legitimise the track" given the widespread public belief they were hearing Smith's voice. The label claims it was not informed of the AI's role and declined the offer.
Spotify confirmed it detected the impersonation, removed the song, and has not paid out any royalties for it. Billboard also stated it reserves the right to remove titles involved in active copyright disputes.
Ongoing Dispute and Industry-Wide Implications
I Run has since been re-recorded with new vocals by singer Kaitlin Aragon and charted at No. 37 in the UK. However, Famm maintains the new version still infringes Smith's rights, believing the top line was created using AI models trained on Smith's catalogue.
In a statement on Instagram, Famm argued the strategy relied on "public confusion as a key part of the marketing strategy." The label is pushing for a precedent: if it successfully proves AI's involvement and secures a share of the song, it plans to allocate proceeds pro-rata to all of Smith's songwriting collaborators, whose work potentially trained the AI.
This case emerges amid broader legal clashes between major labels and AI firms. Sony Music, Warner Music Group, and Universal Music Group have previously sued Suno, alleging it trained its model on copyrighted works. Suno claims fair use. Warner has since struck a deal with Suno, while litigation with Sony and Universal continues.
Famm's statement framed the issue as part of a larger battle, highlighting creators as "collateral damage in the race by governments and corporations towards AI dominance." The label called for clear labelling of AI-generated music and for creators to be credited and compensated if their work is used for AI training.
The incident has caused collateral damage beyond Smith, with a separate female musician who also uses the name Haven reporting she was harassed online by commenters accusing her of being an AI act.
