Spotify confirms no royalties paid to fake “King Gizzard” band after impersonation
Spotify reveals it never paid royalties to a fake King Gizzard band, find out why.
Spotify has confirmed that it paid no royalties to a fake band impersonating King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard.
King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard removed their music from Spotify in July 2025, in protest over the platform’s executive leadership investing in a defence-technology firm.
Shortly afterward, a suspicious artist profile appeared under the name King Lizard Wizard, with the same song titles, album art, and even lyrics as King Gizzard’s previous releases. Listeners initially encountered the tracks as though they were legitimate, but many quickly realized the recordings sounded like generic instrumentals or poorly generated sound-alikes.
Fans raised alarms, and the impersonator’s tracks were soon removed. Spotify issued a statement: the uploads violated platform policy against artist impersonation, and “no royalties were paid out for any streams generated.”
The false profile had managed to stay online, and accumulate streams, for weeks before being taken down. For many users, the situation was a concerning example of how easy it is for AI-generated or fraudulent content to slip through the cracks.
For the real band, the moment was disheartening. Their frontman expressed disbelief at the irony: after leaving the platform as a statement, their identity was co-opted by what appears to be a botched AI-music operation masquerading as them.
Spotify’s quick confirmation that no royalties were paid is a necessary step, but many argue it’s only the beginning of a larger problem that streaming services face in 2025.
On one hand, the removal shows the platform is capable of enforcing its impersonation rules, even if response time was slow. On the other hand, critics say the fact that this fake act existed at all, unchallenged for weeks, illustrates how vulnerable streaming libraries are to AI-generated, fraudulent content.
It also raises questions about oversight: how many other “artists” on Spotify could be fake, AI-generated or impersonations, quietly collecting streams while real musicians miss out? Previous investigations have uncovered systemic issues around so-called “bot artists” or “playlist fillers,” where payouts reportedly sidestep human creators altogether.
While the removal is good news, many fans and musicians think Spotify should be more proactive. Waiting for users or journalists to spot suspicious uploads means platforms remain reactive, rather than actively policing content before it reaches listeners.
The King Gizzard incident is unlikely to be isolated. As generative AI becomes more powerful and easier to access, more artists may face copycats, fake clones, or AI-generated impostors. For listeners, this risks confusing quality content with fake or synthetic substitutes.
Critics are calling for clearer transparency from streaming platforms, better vetting of uploads, more stringent automated detection of impersonators, and faster removal of suspicious content. Others want compensation structures and royalty flows to be audited more rigorously, ensuring real artists don’t lose out to AI-generated replacements.