Technology

35125 readers

353 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.

Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.

Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

MinutePhrase@lemmy.ml

208

An AI Singer-Songwriter Just Debuted Her Original Song—And The Responses Are Just Brutal (www.comicsands.com)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by ghosthand@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.ml

201 comments fedilink hide all child comments

AI singer-songwriter 'Anna Indiana' debuted her first single 'Betrayed by this Town' on X, formerly Twitter—and listeners were not too impressed.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The threshold for how much human input counts as "authorship" is extremely low. Photographers get copyright over pictures they take when their sole contribution to the image is aiming the camera and pushing a button. Most AI-generated art involves a lot of human input in the form of prompting, selecting outputs, and then often tweaking or splicing them together in various ways.

But even if by some weird twist US courts do rule this sort of thing to be public domain, why wouldn't this "threaten human artists?" Having awesome AI-generated art being public domain seems like the best of both worlds to me - you get awesome art and it's legally unencumbered. How would a human artist compete with that? Their art would be more expensive and you'd have all kinds of limitations on what you can do with it.

[–] TheOneWithTheHair@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

If the autogenerated art becomes too close to copyrighted art, then you'll have humans suing AI generators.

George Harrison's My Sweet Lord is very similar to He's So Fine by the Chiffons. And that was an easy case. But some cases in requires deeper analysis, such as Lana Del Ray's Get Free.

In January 2018, singer Lana Del Rey claimed that Radiohead were suing her because of alleged similarities between their 1992 debut single Creep, and her song Get Free, from her 2017 album Lust for Life. The band's publishers Warner/Chappell subsequently denied taking legal action, but did confirm requesting credit for “all writers” of Creep.

The Guardian spoke to a professional composer to analyse the songs, who noted that the chords used are rare in pop music, and the melodies bear an uncanny resemblance, although in conclusion “imagined the similarities are unintentional”.

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20190605-nine-most-notorious-copyright-cases-in-music-history

If AI is sampling, then how do you defend it being unintentional? While all Radiohead sought was credit on the writing (in this case), would humans (whose livelihood is being threatened) be so generous with an AI composition? And if the music industry is threatened by AI, they will lawyer up.