Musical artists often spend years or even decades cultivating a loyal audience by building a brand around their stage names. These stage names develop into valuable trademarks with rights and goodwill built through the careful creation and production of original music. Recently, however, these stage name trademarks are facing a new and unconventional method of infringement.
In recent years, some musical artists have awoken to online buzz about their new record released overnight on Spotify, Apple Music, and other music streaming platforms. The issue is, they didn’t release a new record. Yet their official streaming profiles suddenly link to an album full of music they had no hand in creating that was uploaded by a distributor they’ve never worked with before. By the time many of these artists find out about their “new record,” it may have already accumulated tens of thousands of streams. Even worse, the albums are often of low technical and compositional quality, featuring AI-generated instrumental music that bears no resemblance to the actual artists’ signature sounds, which negative online fan reviews are quick to point out.
The above scenario is not far off from the real-life experience of ODESZA, a prolific electronic music duo from Washington who receive tens of millions of monthly streams across platforms. In February 2025, an unannounced new album titled Worlds appeared on their official streaming profiles on Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, Soundcloud, and Tidal. The album was uncharacteristically simplistic in its compositional and recording quality and obviously AI-generated (including the artwork), leading scores of confused fans to leave negative posts on designated music forums about the album and how it reflected on their brand. Gintaras Radauskas, How did a Fake ODESZA Album Slip Through to Major Streaming Platforms?, CYBERNEWS (Feb. 12, 2025). The fake album created needless confusion and a significant mess for the band to clean up.
Despite the music media coverage on this problem, fake albums continue to plague streaming platforms, recently affecting A list techno music phenoms Charlotte De Witte and Amelie Lens, who each took several days to get the respective fake albums entirely removed from various platforms, including Spotify, YouTube Music, and Apple Music. U/Moistest_Pretzel, Charlette De Witte/Amalie Lens Hacked?, REDDIT (May, 2025).
The consequences from these fake albums are palpable. Using the goodwill accumulated by an artist’s carefully crafted and original discography, these infringers can siphon profits from streams, leaving the tagged artist to deal with the fallout of confused and disappointed fans flooding forums with negative reviews. It can take days or, in the case of English psychedelic rock band Gong, weeks to remove a fake album, during which time the infringer continues to profit from streams at the expense of the tagged artist. Ashley Belanger, Spotify Criticized for Letting Fake Albums Appear on Real Artist Pages, ARS TECHNICA (Oct. 15, 2024). Further, one fake album released on an official streaming platform can create a chain reaction of misattribution with third-party music databases, which artists will also need to seek out and remove.
How can musical artists fight back against these infringers misappropriating their valuable trademarks to usurp streams and revenue? To establish trademark infringement, an artist must show that the mark in question is a valid trademark, that they own said trademark, and the infringer’s use of the trademark to identify goods or services causes a likelihood of confusion with consumers. See Commerce Nat’l Ins. Servs., Inc. v. Commerce Ins. Agency, Inc., 214 F.3d 432, 437 (3d Cir. 2000). With these elements in mind, in the cases of ODESZA, Gong, Charlotte De Witte, and Amelie Lens, there exists a strong case that the fake albums uploaded by scam distributors amount to actionable trademark infringement. If successful action is taken against these infringers, an artist could be entitled to an injunction and possibly damages, including the infringer’s profits, actual damages (lost profits or harm to reputation), and in some cases, attorney’s fees. See 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).
Another available claim might be trademark dilution by tarnishment. Dilution by tarnishment occurs when unauthorized use of a famous mark is used in connection with goods or services that serve to degrade the beliefs or reputation of the famous mark’s owner. The difficulty of pursuing dilution claims, however, is that it requires the artist’s mark to be considered “famous,” a legally recognized status that is often difficult to prove for all but the most well-known musical artists. See Coach Servs., Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC, 668 F.3d 1356, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Of course, lawsuits are not always a real-world option for musical artists. On a more practical level, most major streaming platforms have a system for reporting and removing these fake albums. However, as discussed above, artists are frequently left waiting for platforms to take action while infringers continue to profit using artists’ valuable trademarks.
Thankfully, there is a glimmer of hope for musical artists facing these challenges.
On July 31, 2024, several U.S. Senators introduced the NO FAKES Act to combat the many issues artists face in the age of AI. The new legislation aims to protect creators’ likenesses by providing a national standard to address infringement of their digital rights. NO FAKES Act of 2024, S. 4875, 118th Congress (2023–2024). Specifically, the bill will set a standard to hold individuals and companies liable for digitally replicating an artist’s performance, including the use of AI-generated music aiming to mimic their style. The bill is also proactive, aiming to set new standards for notice-and-takedown processes for publishing platforms, holding them accountable for failing to act on unauthorized digital replicas if they had actual knowledge of the lack of authorization. If this bill is enacted, it will offer alternative legal recourse for the issue of fake albums outside the scope of trademark law.
However, it’s already been nearly one year since the NO FAKES Act’s introduction, and seemingly little traction has been made to bring it to a vote anytime soon. If fake albums continue to be a growing issue for musical artists on streaming services, bringing action under trademark law may be their most effective option.
