Elvis Act

Tennessee Passes Law to Better Protect Artists from AI

German politicians, too, are repeatedly tempted to lend significance to a law by giving it a distinctive name—and to gain popularity for themselves in its wake. With a wink, one must admit, however, that the “ELVIS Act,” which will take effect on July 2, 2024, deserves to be recognized as having outstanding significance solely because of its name. The Elvis Act is, however, also of great significance in terms of its content. The full title of the law is the “Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security Act,” or the ELVIS Act for short.

Protecting the Music Industry and Artists

Tennessee is the U.S. state where the bulk of the music industry and its artists are based. This may explain why the state is the first to enact such a law. The “Human Artistry Campaign”initiative is calling for a nationwide regulation. According to reports, legislation to that effect is being drafted in Washington.

AI applications are already capable of “recreating” artists—that is, their voices, as well as images or videos. The Beatles did exactly that last year with the single “Now and Then,” “restoring” John Lennon’s voice. The law is aimed precisely at preventing this. After all, the Elvis Act protects the copyright to the uniqueness of one’s own voice, face, and body.

The open letter from the Artist Rights Alliance (ARA) takes the same stance. Many well-known artists are calling for better practices regarding artificial intelligence. Billie Eilish, Steve Wonder, Pearl Jam, Robert Smith, and 200 other artists have signed it. The letter explicitly calls for protection against “the use of AI to steal the voices and images of professional artists, against the infringement of creators’ rights, and against the destruction of the music ecosystem.”

The Situation in Germany

In Germany, these legal interests are generally protected. As early as 1999, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruled in its “Marlene Dietrich decision” (Case No. I ZR 49/97) that the voice is part of the general right of personality under Article I and Article II, Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law (GG).

The same applies, incidentally, to the right to one's own image.

Biometric data is also protected under data protection laws as personal data pursuant to the GDPR.

The debate over Scarlett Johansson’s voice and the AI voice used by ChatGPT shows that this issue is highly topical. It will be interesting to see what solution is ultimately found to effectively protect artists’ rights and personality rights on the one hand, while fully leveraging the potential of AI on the other.

Please contact us if you have any questions