It’s been a wild few weeks in the music industry, starting with the discovery of a song using AI deepfakes of Drake and the Weeknd’s voices. While neither major artist was responsible for its creation, Grimes has taken to Twitter to offer 50% royalties on any AI-generated song that uses her voice. This would likely undermine her ability to collect royalties in the first place, but it seems like this is just the beginning of a new era where copyright is no longer as important as it once was.
Invention isn’t a new concept, and musicians have been using technology to push the limits of their creativity for centuries. However, recent advances in AI have allowed for some truly innovative uses of the technology. For example, YACHT trained an AI on 14 years of their music and then synthesized the results into the album “Chain Tripping.” Holly+ is a website that freely allows anyone to create deepfake music using her own voice. These examples show just how powerful and versatile AI can be when it comes to creating art- something that has always been a major focus for artists throughout history.
Although Herndon may openly invite people to experiment with AI art using her likeness, most artists don’t even know that people can model their voice before it’s too late. This poses a major problem, as the technology is advancing at an alarming rate. The sooner artists become familiar with this capability, the better able they will be to create work that is both innovative and meaningful.
Spotify’s CEO, Daniel Ek, is cautiously optimistic about the fast-developing technology of AI-generated music. Despite the company taking down “Heart on my Sleeve,” an AI song that uses deepfakes of Drake and the Weeknd, Ek seems to believe that there is great potential for this type of music in the future. While it will take some time for this type of artistry to catch on with consumers and Rankers alike, Ek is confident that Spotify will be responsible for playing a major role in its eventual success.
One of the primary reasons AI is seen as a future-proof industry is that it will lead to more music being created. Ek highlighted how great music is culturally, and believes that by incorporating AI into the production process, more great pieces of art can be created.
AI’s ability to algorithmically analyze huge amounts of data sets could lead to more accurate predictions about individual customers’ musical tastes. This could give high-volume music streaming services a significant edge over their smaller competitors by identifying preferred artist, track, and album selections ahead of time. While this technology has the potential to improve the user experience for large music listeners, it may be disastrous for independent artists who rely on word-of-mouth recommendations and direct sales as their main sources of income.
Henderson Cole is right. It can be a dangerous step to allow artists to profit from their work. This is because it could lead to them becoming too commercialized and losing sight of their original purpose.
If the COVID-19 pandemic has wreaked havoc on the music industry, it’s only because artists and record companies have let technology do all the work for them for years now. The streaming model is arguably to blame, as payouts to artists have plummeted and it’s become increasingly difficult for musicians to make a living from their original craft. In this light, technology companies like Facebook are using musicians as guinea pigs in their quest to investigate new AI-based tools that can be appropriated and repurposed without consent. This experimentation has been seen as unfair by many who argue that musicians should be compensated fairly for the use of their work – particularly given how COVID-19 could irrevocably harm their careers.
While it is still unclear how usage of music in technology will develop, there are some ways in which it could be put to good use. One way that music could be used in technology is as a way to attract attention and interest. For example, Erickson mentioned that music has a special social role in the development of technology; by attaching it to any kind of emerging technology, companies can create a more general interest and sell their products more easily. In addition, by using music as part of an advertisement or marketing campaign, manufacturers can reach people who may not ordinarily be interested in their product. Though it is still early days for the use of music in technology and much experimentation will need to take place for this usage to grow into something mainstream, there are many potential benefits for both parties involved should this trend continue
The crypto industry has seen a lot of growth in recent years, with some believing that it has the potential to change the status quo of music royalties and ticketing. However, adoption beyond a niche audience remains limited. This is likely due to several factors, including the complexity of cryptocurrencies and their associated ecosystems, concerns about financial security, and doubts about their long-term viability. While there are many hurdles to overcome before crypto can truly be said to have revolutionized these industries, its continued evolution is definitely worth watching.
The adoption of sampling technology has created a gray area for artists and labels. On one hand, sampling is a traditional musical technique that allows for creativity and variation in music. On the other hand, there is the concern over whether or not artists are getting fair compensation when they use samples without permission from the original artist or their label. While this technology may be slowly taking hold among musicians, there is still much debate over its proper usage.
The fear of artificial intelligence fabricating music without the artist’s consent is a hinderance to the development of this technology. However, as we see more and more companies working to create AI-generated music, it is likely that these fears will decrease.
Fair use arguments typically hinge on the idea that copyrighted material can be used for a limited purpose, such as commentary or criticism. In some cases, this may be enough to make use of the material justified. However, there is always a risk that using copyrighted material without permissions could lead to legal trouble. If you are unsure about whether or not you need explicit permission to use copyrighted material, it is best to consult an attorney.
Cole’s argument is that AI music would likely not be given the same protection as copyrighted works, due to its closer resemblance to natural creations. Additionally, Cole contends that it would be difficult for copyright holders to prove a case of infringement against an AI musician, as there would be little or no identifiable original work(s) underlying such pieces. These factors might lead courts to justify less leniency for AI musicians in comparison with traditional music creators.
However, Cole believes that this is a possibility in the future as artificial intelligence progresses. In a world where Ed Sheeran and Robin Thicke are getting sued just for sounding similar to a hit song, someone using AI to copy an artists’ voice or musical sound could be seen as less risky. It is likely that future copyright infringement cases will focus on whether the AI was inspired by the original artist rather than just copying their sound.
UMG believes that the use of generative AI in the music industry will have a harmful effect on both artists and consumers. While they acknowledge its potential benefits, such as speeding up song creation, UMG is concerned about how this technology could be used to unfairly manipulate or remix tracks without consent from creators. They also fear that it could lead to a decline in creativity among musicians, as AI algorithms are becoming increasingly sophisticated and able to create music that is relatively indistinguishable from human composition.
UMG’s statement raises the question of which side of history music creators, fans, and human creative expression want to be on: the side of artists who are rightfully compensated for their work, or on the side of artificial intelligence-generated music that can be manipulated without talent or originality? While it is still early days for AI-generated music, it is likely that more and more artists will lose income as platforms continue to create algorithms that mimic their music without payment. It will be interesting to see how this issue develops over time – either platforms begin paying producers and songwriters fairly for their work, or we see a shift towards AI-generated music being less popular due to its lack of quality.