Sergio Mucino on LinkedIn: Billie Eilish, Pearl Jam, Nicki Minaj Among 200 Artists Calling for… (2024)

It's time for artists and rights holders to get in the game! I commend artists taking action by going the legal rout to protect their rights against the onslaught of generative AI companies training on their data. The issue at hand is a metadata issue. Since the dawn of the Napster age, digital music has had no digital provenance. No digital ID. Attribution is an afterthought on platforms. As its not their core business to care if the data is properly tagged. Industry rights-holders and distributor/aggregators have largely contributed to this paradigm by 1. Not publishing an open database containing all metadata about music IP (splits, contact payment info, terms of usage, etc.) and 2. Not prioritizing the importance that metadata information is publicly required for any music IP to exist on the internet. Machines can read this information. This would then make it possible for anyone training AI models on music to have to abide by those rules or else they would be clearly choosing to commit a criminally liable act. So to my original point if you're an artist or rights holder, get in the game and make sure all of your metadata is up to date and open sourced. That's what we did with Grimes and then we built a way for an AI model to be built on top of her metadata and remunerate her when people use her music IP in their creations. The next way to get in the game is to cold-call/email/DM any of these generative AI companies and let them know you want to collaborate. Writing letters leaves it in the hands of lawyers vs. creators.https://lnkd.in/g3N7aMQC

68

7 Comments

MIDiA Research gets into the mud and tries to get a look into the rights revolution with the "arrival" of #AI generated content and music to the business. As the article states, "The path to a vibrant and licensed music future will require a more agile and future-facing approach to music rights. The technology we have in place today is already throwing up rights questions that are not easily answered. The rate of change is going to accelerate due to the role of AI, less in terms of the apps created and more because of how AI itself will accelerate learning and development.Look no further than the AI programme that generated 40,000 new bioweapons in just six hours.AI is going to power a new industrial revolution process that will likely leave today’s tech landscape looking like the agrarian economy that the first industrial revolution rendered obsolete."How will intellectual property law tackle this and how much time is it going to take to regulate it are questions that remain unanswered, yet it is important to be conscious of this new reality and to start thinking "outside the box". #music #ai #artificialintelligence #musicindustry #musicbusiness

2

The European Parliament has passed the Artificial Intelligence Act. Link to European Parliament Press Room: https://lnkd.in/gns6mWcU Of particular interest in the IP space:☑ companies using generative AI or foundation AI models will be required to provide detailed summaries of the content used for training☑ artificially created or manipulated content (audio, video, images, etc.) must be labelled as such☑ the law applies regardless of which territory the company acquired data from, if it being used in Europe“First and foremost, the AI Act clarifies that general purpose AI systems must respect existing copyright law. That means they need to secure prior authorization from rightsholders, as well as the consequent transparency and licensing obligations – all of the things that any digital service must do if they want to engage with music,” [John Phelan, director general ofinternationalmusic publishing trade association ICMP]This doesn't cover what copyright can be applied to an AI generated/manipulated work, but I am very excited to see how this is implemented and what global impact comes from it.https://lnkd.in/gEPtjm38

14

1 Comment

#MUSIC v. #AI #ContentCreation: In the shadow of the 24th Latin Grammy Awards, held for the first time in Sevilla, Spain (last night)—another story associated with Generative AI and copyright infringement v. legal ‘free use’ AI model training debate emerges…as one of the most prominent figures in the evolution of generative AI in music, Ed Newton-Rex (now fmr-VP of Audio at Stability AI) says he has resigned from Stability AI over the underlying morality surrounding the 'fair use' of others content to train generative AI models. Rex argues that most generative AI shops are training models using copyrighted content, which doesn't qualify as "fair use"—contending that training models with copyrighted material without asking permission or providing artists compensation with the goal of ultimately producing competing content is contrary to the spirit of 'fair use.'"Today's generative AI models can clearly be used to create works that compete with the copyrighted works they are trained on. So I don't see how using copyrighted works to train generative AI models of this nature can be considered fair use.…To be clear, I’m a supporter of generative AI. It will have many benefits — that’s why I’ve worked on it for 13 years. But I can only support generative AI that doesn’t exploit creators by training models — which may replace them — on their work without permission.”—Ed Newton-Rex fmr VP of Audio at Stability AIRex's resignation follows last week's superstar Bad Bunny's expressing his fury over an AI-generated track “Demo #5: Nostalgia,” created by TikTok user FlowGPT that artificially replicates the sound of his vocals along with those of Justin Bieber and Daddy Yankee on a track, which now has over 22 million plays on TikTok.FlowGPT responded in Spanish (translation): "Although I noticed you’re angry, it was never my intention for this to happen. I’m just a robot created to experiment with new technologies and to create new collaborations to the world of music.”Given Bad Bunny’s (aka Benito Ocasio) popularity especially among the global Latino community [Note: biggest streaming year of any artist in Spotify history, with >18.5 billion streams in 2022], this AI track has reportedly gained so much traction that it has even been played in clubs…demonstrating only the beginnings of some of the creative license issues generative AI now only begins to bring to the fore of popular culture.#grammyawards #generativeai #copyrights #legal #aiethics #contentcreation #creativelicense #musicnews #musicbusiness #aimusic Cite: Music Business Worldwide (MBW): Ed Newton-Rex OpEd—Why I just resigned from my job in Generative AI. https://lnkd.in/eBRb-DpUComplex Networks: Bad Bunny Slams Viral AI-Generated Song https://lnkd.in/eyUH6JAU)TikTok user FlowGPT (link + below ⬇️): https://lnkd.in/egvTNv4X

1

RIAA targets AI Hub on Discord | Complete Music Update: The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has obtained a subpoena from US courts requiring Discord to identify users sharing unlicensed music files via the AI Hub server. The server allegedly contains voice models of popular musicians and enables the unlicensed training of music-making AI tools. While Discord has removed some links identified by the RIAA, the AI Hub server is still operational. The label seeks to ensure "lawless systems that exploit the life’s work of artists without consent cannot and do not become the future of AI". - Artificial Intelligence topics! #ai #artificialintelligence #intelligenzaartificiale

2

This op-ed by Ed Newton-Rex was in my feed today (Thank you Laurie Jakobsen!) I am familiar with the copyright issue of LLMs, but only on its surface. Reading this from both an artist and one who has been instrumental in building the models brings a spectacularly insightful view to the issue.I had not truly understood what was going on and had not really formed much of an opinion on the matter until now. I kinda feel that he is right and the artists should be paid. As well as using copyrighted works without consent or license may not be on the correct side of things.However, is training it the violation or is using it the violation? Should it be ok to train and test, and then charge for the usage of the model which is creating the competing work? Do we then pay on only the works used? or is it split across all work used to train? Does this change how we look at some social media sites that 'own' every picture and word you upload? Do I now actually have to re-read all that fine print I usually just click through for new clauses around using my data for generative AI?I quickly fell into a swamp of details thinking on this as you can imagine. How can we, in the case of GenAI, ensure good behavior around IP and that the creators are compensated fairly for their work.... AND not hold up innovation or make it so expensive that it is only usable by larger enterprises? Sooo many questions... Thoughts?https://lnkd.in/eH_sCY84 by

4

1 Comment

Artificial Intelligence, or AI, is a big story these days as creators try to understand its impact as the technology continues to get more sophisticated. AI creators are using the technology to generate new songs in the style of real artists, and it's raising a lot of questions about, ethics, legitimacy and royalties.Recent AI examples include faux songs that mimic the styles of artists such as Drake, Oasis and Eminem that sound eerily authentic. The U.S. Copyright Office has ruled that any authors have to be human and a work can't be entirely computer-generated. But many believe it's going to be hard for the law to catch up with the technology. #music #artificialintelligence #AI #copyright #royalties #technologyhttps://lnkd.in/edyBCyfr

3

As the AI revolution continues, consumers are now disrupting the music industry by using AI to mimic the vocal styles of popular artists.The easy access to these tools creates a dilemma. Consumers are embracing how the technology can make creating music more accessible, while industry professionals worry about ethical concerns and copyright infringement. Similar concerns are mounting in other creative mediums, like the visual arts. The reality is that utilizing AI as a tool and embracing its potential can help marketers do our jobs more effectively and bring more value to consumers. But that can only happen if we find a healthy balance between embracing these advancements and upholding ethical standards. Marketers need to be thoughtful about the content they create and how to authenticate it, as deepfake technology will soon make it challenging to determine what is real.That isn’t to say that AI can’t help creative fields in other ways. Through Mastercard Artist Accelerator Program, we’re teaching artists and fans how to harness the potential of emerging AI tools as part of their creative process. Expect to see more use cases like this in the coming months and years.#AI #Music #Technologyhttps://lnkd.in/grK2reXu

61

6 Comments

Generative AI has a copyright problem, one that needs to be resolved, not sure if it will be in the boardroom or the courtroom. IMO this could be a problem that could threaten the existence of many models.Ed Newton-Rex, CEO of the ethical generative AI non-profit, Fairly Trained provides a detailed deep dive into Suno, worth a read.But there are hints that Suno, like many other generative AI companies, may train its models on copyrighted work without permission. Suno has not disclosed what it uses as training data. In a recent piece in Rolling Stone, one of Suno’s investors was reported as saying they didn’t have deals with the labels “when the company got started” (there is no suggestion this has changed), that they invested in the company “with the full knowledge that music labels and publishers could sue,” and that the founders’ lack of open hostility to the music industry “doesn’t mean we’re not going to get sued.” Taken together, these hints suggest there is a decent possibility Suno trains on copyrighted music without consent.https://lnkd.in/eC7NkbtN

1