![\"\"](\"https:\/\/jolt.richmond.edu\/files\/2025\/10\/daniel-romero-6V5vTuoeCZg-unsplash-300x169.jpg\")
<\/p>\nBy: Brooke Gerber<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
We live in a time where artificial intelligence (AI) is the new \u201cIt Girl.\u201d From the film industry to photography to literature, AI has become one of the most talked-about forces shaping modern creativity. But has AI evolved to the point where it can break into the Billboard Hot 100? Increasingly, the answer seems to be yes. AI-generated songs are gaining traction around the world, with many listeners not realizing the music they\u2019re streaming was not performed by a human. That lack of transparency raises legal and ethical questions, particularly surrounding the role of streaming platforms in protecting consumers from being misled.<\/p>\n
In June 2025, a band called The Velvet Sundown released their debut album, Floating on Echoes, on Spotify. Within a month, they had racked up over a million monthly listeners and landed the No. 1 spot on Spotify\u2019s Viral 50 chart in several countries.[1]<\/a> However, as the album continued to gain traction, music fans and journalists began to question whether the band actually existed.[2]<\/a> After receiving criticism for their uncanny band photos and unusual social media presence, The Velvet Sundown confirmed that the project was fully AI-generated: the songs, the voices, and even the band\u2019s image were created using machine learning.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n The reveal sparked immediate backlash. Many listeners felt \u201cbetrayed\u201d upon learning the truth \u2013 not because the music wasn\u2019t \u201creal\u201d but because they were never told what they were consuming.[4]<\/a> This highlights a critical problem: there are no universal rules requiring streaming platforms to disclose when a song is AI-generated. Without such disclosure, listeners may believe they\u2019re supporting human artists, thus influencing their purchasing and streaming decisions in ways that could potentially amount to deception.<\/p>\n This issue isn\u2019t limited to fictional bands. In May 2024, country music singer Randy Travis released \u201cWhere That Came From,\u201d his first new song in over a decade.[5]<\/a> After a stroke in 2013 left him unable to sing, Travis\u2019s team trained an AI model on years of his recordings to replicate his voice; these cloned vocals were then overlaid on a pre-recorded track originally sung by another artist.[6]<\/a> This technique allowed Travis\u2019s music to hit the charts once again, debuting at No. 45 on Billboard\u2019s Country Airplay chart.[7]<\/a> While Travis\u2019s team was transparent about the process, the song\u2019s release demonstrated to many just how easily AI can create commercially viable music.<\/p>\n The stark difference between these two examples \u2013 with one openly embracing AI and the other hiding it \u2013 illustrates why U.S. regulators may soon need to step in. Under the Federal Trade Commission Act, businesses are prohibited from engaging in \u201cunfair or deceptive acts or practices.\u201d[8]<\/a> While this law has traditionally applied to areas such as advertising and product labeling, its language could also cover situations where consumers are misled about the source of the music they are streaming. If platforms like Spotify are actively promoting AI-generated artists without disclosure, they may be accused of deceiving listeners who believe their streams support real performers.<\/p>\n Looking ahead, regulators may require platforms to label AI-generated content in a manner similar to nutrition facts or parental advisory warnings. Such a rule would not ban AI creativity; rather, it would ensure that consumers were equipped with the tools to make informed decisions. As The Velvet Sundown has shown, failing to disclose the origins of a song can erode trust in streaming services and the music industry as a whole. To stay ahead of legal challenges, and to keep their audiences engaged, platforms must embrace transparency before AI music takes center stage.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Link to image source:<\/p>\n https:\/\/unsplash.com\/photos\/black-and-white-headphones-on-white-table-6V5vTuoeCZg<\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Ethan Beck, A \u201860s-flavored band blew up on Spotify. They\u2019re AI.<\/em>, The Washington Post (July 8, 2025), https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/entertainment\/music\/2025\/07\/08\/velvet-sundown-artificial-intelligence-spotify\/.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Id.<\/em><\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Graham Barlow, Spotify\u2019s latest breakout band The Velvet Sundown appears to be AI-generated \u2013 and fans aren\u2019t happy<\/em>, TechRadar (July 3, 2025), https<\/em>:\/\/www.techradar.com\/computing\/artificial-intelligence\/spotifys-latest-breakout-band-the-velvet-sundown-appears-to-be-ai-generated-and-fans-arent-happy.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Id;<\/em> see also <\/em>Konstancija Gasaityt\u0117, AI in disguise? Music lovers angry at Spotify for promoting an allegedly fake band<\/em>, Cybernews (July 1, 2025), https:\/\/cybernews.com\/tech\/spotify-ai-generated-band\/.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Maria Sherman, With help from AI, Randy Travis got his voice back. Here\u2019s how his first song post-stroke came to be<\/em>, The Associated Press (May 6, 2024), https:\/\/apnews.com\/article\/randy-travis-artificial-intelligence-song-voice-589a8c142f70ed8ccf53af6d32c662dc.<\/p>\n