A Cardiff rock band is speaking out after an AI “artist” trained on their music began outperforming them on streaming platforms like Spotify and Deezer.
Lucas Woodland, frontman of the Cardiff-based band Holding Absence, revealed that an AI artist called Bleeding Verse has directly impacted their music. He said the AI was trained on their songs and now attracts more monthly listeners than the band itself.
So, an AI “band” who cite us as an influence (ie, it’s modelled off our music) have just overtaken us on Spotify, in only TWO months.
It’s shocking, it’s disheartening, it’s insulting – most importantly – it’s a wake up call.
Oppose AI music, or bands like us stop existing.
— Lu (@Lucaswoodland) September 30, 2025[1]
The band discovered hologram-style AI tracks, generated with their song features, listed under a new Spotify artist profile. Those tracks quickly racked up more streams than the originals. Band members called the incident “shocking, disheartening and insulting,” arguing that the AI had co-opted their creative identity without permission.
According to band’s analysis, AI tools took the band’s publicly available recordings, extracted instrumental, vocal, and melody data, and recombined them into new tracks. These AI-generated versions mimicked their style so closely that Spotify’s recommendation algorithms began favoring them over the originals.
They suspect the producers behind the AI versions used a combination of generative models, vocal cloning, and sample splicing to create new covers indistinguishable from the originals in casual listening environments.
This case begs the question: how do current copyright laws treat AI works derived from existing artists? The band claims they never consented to derivative training or re-release of these AI tracks. While some jurisdictions allow fair use or sampling, the boundaries for AI-trained tracks remain murky.
Legal and music industry observers say this could spur lawsuits or push labels to demand stricter rules around model training, licensing, and downstream streaming rights. Artists and regulators may further pressure platforms like Spotify to enforce identity verification, transparent provenance, or royalty splits for AI-derived content.
Spotify recently announced new measures to address the rise of AI-generated music[2] on its platform. The company says it will require clearer labeling of AI-made content, strengthen copyright safeguards, and introduce systems to detect and block manipulative streaming activity tied to AI tracks. These policies reassure artists and listeners that algorithmically trained replicas will not drown out human creativity. However, they agreed that it is difficult to make an industry standard without taking every stakeholder on board.
Meanwhile, Holding Absence is working with legal counsel and music rights organizations to push back. They’re demanding removal of the AI tracks, compensation for lost streams, and clearer rules for AI use in music.
However, as cases like this highlight, the gap between policy and enforcement remains wide, leaving artists vulnerable to exploitation until stronger protections take hold.
Spotify has not yet issued an official statement.
References
- ^ September 30, 2025 (twitter.com)
- ^ rise of AI-generated music (www.techjuice.pk)