My stance is simple: No training without consent, and no application of copyright to fully AI-generated music. If people want to have fun and experiment, that's great, but for music for picture, music streaming services, any kind of broadcast, a human being needs to hold the copyright to said work. It seems the new EU AI leglislation is moving in that direction.
@WillyJunior
Ай бұрын
What if AI music is public domain?
@user-bp8oo4gr9c
Ай бұрын
I'm not sure why so many people would seem to think that there's some kind of urgent necessity to have AI generated Music. The reality is that we live in an age where there is so much existing human music available, including much high quality music, which most people have never gotten around to listening to, and don't even know that it exists. And there's also plenty of opportunity for things like sampling and looping, etc. Thus democratization of music is already sky high. AI generative music isn't all about democratizing music. it's about taking away artistic opportunity from humans, and handing it over to machines.
@melodyinwhisper
Ай бұрын
You're missing the very personalized nature of AI music though. It is very fun to create a full on big band arrangement, or symphonic arrangement, for my girlfriend's birthday. Let's say I'm not a good musician; or even if I am pretty good, I'm not going to hire an arranger, and hire 60 musicians. Or for something fun. My family had the best time over Christmas using AI to generate pretty good sounding music about various events. I could create a song instantly about how I creamed their ass at this board game. Or create a funny song about how my niece almost got arrested for shoplifting a jalepeno popper. It is a fun and useful tool to have. But it's only fun and useful if it actually sounds good, because it has been trained on good stuff.
@eriong.7446
Ай бұрын
I was against this as well. I still kind of am, because it scares me. But I made a whole album with udio just for myself and realized 2 things: 1, it’s not like other music, because it’s exactly my taste. I did use more than a hundred generations per song, so I threw most of it out, but what remained was only what I liked, so the songs are 100% to my taste. And unless I did it myself, that was not possible before. And though i do make my own music ever since I know, I can’t sing, I don’t have a full band, etc, so this is different. But the point is it’s not music that’s someone else’s taste and I also happen to like most of it, but it’s 100 percent my taste. 2, udio is very repetitive, just like midjourney it has it’s own style. though it can create in many genres, but inside a genre it’s quite recognizable.
@user-bp8oo4gr9c
Ай бұрын
Regarding what you said that it's the job of tech companies to push the limits to see how far they can go. I would argue that tech companies being tech companies have relatively unlimited opportunities of what they can do (besides for art/music), since there are unlimited problems in the world which AI can potentially solve. Artist on the other hand, being artist, have only art to make, and if that opportunity is taken away from them, they'll be in serious trouble. Also, the fact that AI companies are focusing their investments with art, is perhaps serving as a distraction, or rabbit hole, and preventing them from developing things which can solve serious problems, and be of real service to humanity, (and ultimately benefit themselves as well)
@NEEDSHES
Ай бұрын
You're 100% right! Those who say you wrong are ignorant people who don't know what it takes to create something
@GoranBackmanMusic
Ай бұрын
"Stopping people from being creative"... Don't know but last time I ordered a nice dinner from a restaurant I didn't feel very creative. :) But yes, I'm not disagreeing, just feel like this point is argued so many times. Prompting is at best 0.1% as creative as actually creating music.
@wrkeys
Ай бұрын
I agree with you, as a real musician with music projects out. There's just no way to track and compensate the artists, unless it's a blatant copy of like the Mariah Carey Christmas song. We now have A.I session musicians in our Daws. They will definitely have to mitigate how it's used going forward, but I know it's here to stay.
@SyncMyMusic
Ай бұрын
That’s not true. There is a way to compensate artists. Meta and Google did when they trained Pond5 and Shutterstock.
@KarstenHamre
Ай бұрын
As long as artists have given consent it should be OK to train AI on it. It would be the same I guess if a AI Generator would use Pixabay and Pexel images, photos, videos and audio as people on those sites has basically uploaded their stuff for copyright free use.
@bazejkaczmarek8271
Ай бұрын
Think of all those poor passive income side hustle bros. Stock art sites are almost done and nobody’s buying nfts anymore - where are they supposed to go if we don’t let them ruin streaming platforms next?
@SwishAllnetNFT
Ай бұрын
You no longer have to credit UDIO if you are a paid user
@federicoaschieri
Ай бұрын
Asking people to respect law is unethical? Law exists to protect human artists, which we must do, otherwise AI wouldn’t exist either.
@marctomasi1758
Ай бұрын
The day music made big money It corrupted the relationship between music and musicians. maybe IA will help getting rid of the musicians interested in success/money and only the musicians who can’t live without music will continue . The composers who really connected with the pure source of inspiration know that they are not really owning that music . They were a medium. Maybe they will feel bad signing the copyright. I hope that IA will push composers to connect to a higher level of creativity because if they don’t ,AI will be better. We can use this new technology as a fantastic tool.
@kevinwilliams4855
Ай бұрын
Witj iZotope, I believe it eas just the EQ curves...
@NEEDSHES
Ай бұрын
I wonder if in 10 years AI will generate tons of music that any melody we come up with would be something that AI already generated😅 and in 10 years they will figure out how to copyright AI music by changing the copyright law, and were done
@melodyinwhisper
Ай бұрын
How would you practically implement payment? OK, I'm an AI music company, and I want to create absolutely the best possible music generation AI it's possible to make. How to I pay for tens of millions of songs? How much do i pay? How much does each copyright holder/artist get? How does one practically make the best possible music generation AI and pay for every song?
@homeproject4108
Ай бұрын
Is anyone actually using this or plan to use it in our niche? Apart from Red Lobster fail. Jesse, please try to get some library owners or supervisors if you can, so we can hear their exact plans. Honestly, we talk like robots are walking down the street already, yet no one is interested in using this professionally so far. What I do see is a lot of talentless and tasteless non-musicians making 3 albums a day with Suno and posting it on AI music Facebook groups and streaming services. No one cares or listens to it. They think they discovered a fire and they will make a hit and brake the music industry, whatever that means. It goes so far they claim that music industry has these tools for decades and now they finally have access to this. They are completely delusional, it's like talking to a bunch of 10 year olds. It's the sadest thing I've ever seen.
@SyncMyMusic
Ай бұрын
That's exactly what we'll be doing at 'Sync Up' and I have some Library owners coming on the channel soon to talk about these very topics. And correct, it hasn't quite entered the Sync space yet - and that's why we should be talking about it now.
@mobster5626
Ай бұрын
I don't think you are delusional, at least not regarding everything :D Regarding whether the musicians have the power to set the terms or how you expressed it, I do however think is. The reason for that is that as long as Udio and Suno haven't legally done anything wrong and the fair use situation hasn't been solved, they can basically do whatever they want and they know it. And it will probably take years before these cases of fair use even go to court. Furthermore, even if the musicians win, I would be very surprised if you are paid anything of any worth, the publishers might get something and maybe the big stars/groups can force a good deal with them, but I doubt the small musicians without any power will be compensated a lot. I'm not a musician or even all that interested in music to be honest, but I am interested in AI and the effect it has on various industries. So take my opinion as such. I don't think you are unethical for not wanting them to train on your music, yet you would be if you started using Udio, Suno or any AI tool trained on other musician's work. Regarding these companies, including those that do generative AI, I think they could easily compensate people or at least solve this issue in a much better way, yet for some reason they don't. The way they could do it would be to set up a functionality where musicians (including amateurs), could upload songs they have made to their website and they could pay a small amount, there are a lot of people out there that are good at making music etc. So this could at least help them a little. It could also be done with images and videos, lots of people have vacation stuff lying around etc. and I think a lot would be more than happy to help these companies even for free. And they could create huge libraries in no time that they could train on. Obviously, this costs money, which is probably why they won't do it when they can just get it for free, I guess. Also, I would be careful with praising some of these companies too much for paying musicians, obviously, it is cool if they can make deals. But remember that a lot of them are already being sued for copyright infringements, maybe not for music but for other stuff. As I mentioned in another reply to one of your videos, there is a lot of money in this and I think they primarily do it due to their image rather than them being ethical. It was not long ago Facebook was in court for doing bad stuff :D
@bunnyyyyyy398
Ай бұрын
We don’t know whether Udio et al haven’t broken the law because the cases haven’t been litigated yet. Someone has to sue and those arguments have to be made in court, because this is civil law, not criminal law. If they were so confident they were in the full bounds of the law and not doing anything sketchy, why are they so secretive about their training data? Clearly they understand the risks, but are banking on a big cash grab before courts do anything about it. Super lame and unethical.
@mobster5626
Ай бұрын
@@bunnyyyyyy398 I'm not saying that they haven't done anything wrong. I think Jesse made a good demonstration that Udio at least is trained on copyrighted materials, which could explain why they won't talk about it. And exactly as you say, these companies know how to play the game, and if they lose they just pay whatever they have to, if they are the leading company on the market, they will do just fine. They are 100% aware that they might do something wrong here. But the musicians can't do anything before it goes to court, except remove all their music from the internet. :D This is why I don't agree with him that the musicians have all the power to set the terms, they can't really do anything about it.
@NorthernKitty
Ай бұрын
I disagree whether A.I. should be treated any differently than a human due simply to the speed and efficiency with which it can train. If THAT is the basis of your objection, I believe it's misguided and that A.I. should have the same rights of access as humans do. Just because it trains faster shouldn't matter one bit. HOWEVER... I do have deep concerns about how much A.I. simply imitates what it "hears". That's where I feel the focus of the debate should be. Of whether these are truly "transformative" works. Some of the tracks you've shown us from Udio (the Christmas songs, the Paul McCartney sound-alike, etc) are clear examples of plagiarism. So - for now, until A.I. improves significantly - I feel THAT is a valid reason to object to A.I. training without consent. I have no answer to how we can qualify or measure the performance of an A.I. system in order to determine its potential for plagiarism, at what point it can "think for itself". That's more for the experts on these things to conclude. I just know we certainly haven't reached that point yet.
@robotron07
Ай бұрын
Hopefully, you get to read this comment and consider the valid criticism regarding your stance on AI-generated music. You mentioned in one of your videos that you support AI taking over autonomous vehicle driving because it's unsafe to trust humans to drive when machines can do it more accurately. If AI takes over autonomous truck driving, it could significantly impact the trucking industry, which employs about 3.5 million truck drivers and 8.4 million people in trucking-related jobs in the U.S. The exact number of jobs lost depends on various factors, including how quickly and extensively autonomous technology is adopted and regulatory responses. Overall, while AI has the potential to disrupt the industry, the timeline and extent of job losses remain uncertain, and the industry will likely need to adapt to the changes brought by autonomous technology. The adoption of AI in the trucking industry could indeed lead to significant unemployment within that field. With around 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S., the impact on employment could be substantial. However, proponents argue that the benefits could outweigh these losses in the long term, such as: 1. Safety: Autonomous trucks are expected to dramatically reduce the number of accidents. Human error is a leading cause of accidents, and AI systems can operate without fatigue, distractions, or impaired judgment. 2. Cost Efficiency: Lower accident rates and optimized operations can reduce insurance and maintenance costs, leading to significant savings for logistics companies and consumers. 3. New Opportunities: While many driving jobs may be lost, new opportunities could arise in areas such as technology maintenance, logistics planning, and AI system management. Retraining programs and education initiatives could help displaced workers transition to these new roles. I understand that truckers might oppose this change vehemently, and it’s crucial to recognize the broader impact of AI on human activities. It’s not fair to dismiss concerns simply because the changes don’t affect your field directly. This perspective can seem hypocritical. It’s not inherently immoral but may be seen as unethical to ignore the larger implications of AI. AI and automation represent evolution in technology and society. Throughout history, countless species and human advancements have evolved, often at the expense of others. If AI can bring significant benefits, such as improved health, reduced poverty, and solving climate issues, then it may be seen as immoral to oppose it. However, it’s essential to approach AI with caution to avoid potential negative outcomes, such as misuse or unintended consequences. Instead of trying to stop AI advancements, which is likely impossible, it’s better to guide and integrate AI responsibly. AI in music generation, like in other fields, is inevitable. Restricting its use is akin to past attempts to limit access to knowledge or creative expression. AI must learn from existing data, similar to how humans learn from each other. Embracing AI while addressing its ethical and societal impacts is the most practical approach. Ensuring responsible development and implementation can help mitigate negative effects and maximize benefits for all. You seem to simply oppose it "only " when if affects your interests, if everybody has this position it would be better just to stop AI on its tracks ,which is not just unreasonable but impossible you can't stop evolution you have to adapt yourself to it the best you can but crucially being realistic and reasonable ,trying to defend it or oppose it thinking from a specific domain is not healthy in the overall discussion ,this is at the the heart not a music issue or a truckers issue it is a "humanity issue " ,inherent inside the AI nature lies the global scope of its knowledge ,you can't cherry pick what's best for you or not ,THAT IS NOT THE WAY AI WORKS ,you must accept it with its virtues and defects because it comes as a whole package .
@melodyinwhisper
Ай бұрын
While agree, it certainly looks like part of this comment was even generated using AI. :)
@marctomasi1758
Ай бұрын
All the people scared by AI. Are only concerned about the fact that they will loose job and money . And they don’t trust their talent and capacity to touch people. It’s a bit like someone will be scared by a robot to seduce his girlfriend. Let’s be ourselves. Dedicate to discovering our potential and why not use AI as an assistant ,a tool to generate variations based on our own ideas. We already use computers, KZitem, google as tools and integrated these tools as part of our everyday life. How exciting this music AI is! It really changes the all “Industry “concept. What a horrible word to describe the musicians world. Money/CEO/networking To me it’s wrong.
@hoaxburn1
Ай бұрын
Let me explain how the training works. You get a trumpet and blow into it in front of a computer. You tell the computer, "This is what a trumpet sounds like," and then ask it to play a trumpet sound. The computer then plays the sound of a trumpet based on your input. That's machine learning. So, to say that AI trains using copyrighted music is pure nonsense and shows a lack of understanding of machine learning.
@melodyinwhisper
Ай бұрын
I think it's the same problem AI is going to have in every field. Do we want good AI or don't we? If i have an AI doctor, or doctor's assistant, I damn well want it trained on the best medical data in existence. I want an AI lawyer to train on all the case law. I want all AI systems to be trained on the best and widest possible dataset of its area. Only creative people get to opt out of their data being used? Or should a scientist say, "no, i got the Nobel prize for this thing, I discovered and/or invented this breakthrough. AI does not have my consent to learn and use this thing I did." It makes no sense. If we are going to have AI in the world, it needs to train using the best possible available data.
Пікірлер: 32