THE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF AI VOICE CLONING IN THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY

The article traces how AI voice-cloning technology has outpaced the legal frameworks designed to protect performers' identities. It opens with three high-profile controversies (the AI-generated "Heart on My Sleeve" track, a fraudulent Tom Hanks dental ad, and Scarlett Johansson's dispute with OpenAI) to illustrate the stakes. The piece then surveys the legal terrain across five threads: Common-law foundations: Midler v. Ford and Waits v. Frito-Lay, which established that vocal impersonation can constitute misappropriation of identity, but left a fragmented, state-by-state right of publicity. Litigation: Lehrman v. Lovo, Inc., the first major judicial test against an AI voice company, where copyright claims largely failed but state publicity and consumer-protection claims survived. State legislation: Tennessee's ELVIS Act (2024), the first law to explicitly extend publicity rights to voice simulations, set against the broader "patchwork problem" of inconsistent state laws. Federal efforts: the pending NO FAKES Act, the enacted TAKE IT DOWN Act, and the U.S. Copyright Office's 2024 report recommending a federal digital-replica right. Private ordering and comparative law: SAG-AFTRA's collective bargaining protections, and a comparative look at India's judge-made personality rights doctrine (Titan Industries, Anil Kapoor, Arijit Singh cases). It closes with practical guidance for industry stakeholders and performers, concluding that the current legal landscape is a "layered and still-incomplete structure" combining old common-law doctrine, one key court ruling, state statute, pending federal law, union contracts, and comparative Indian jurisprudence.