“Suno’s training data includes essentially all music files of reasonable quality that are accessible on the open internet.”

“Rather than trying to argue that Suno was not trained on copyrighted songs, the company is instead making a Fair Use argument to say that the law should allow for AI training on copyrighted works without permission or compensation.”

Archived (also bypass paywall): https://archive.ph/ivTGs

  • Cagi@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Taking other people’s creative works to create your own for-profit product is illegal in every way except when AI does it. AI is not a person watching videos. AI is a product using others’ content as its bricks and mortar. Thousands of hours of work on a project you completed being used by someone else to turn sa profit, maybe even used in some way you vehemently disagree with, without giving you a dime is unethical and needs regulation from that perspective.

    • antler@feddit.rocks
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Taking other people’s creative works to create your own for-profit product is illegal in every way except when AI does it.

      No, actually its completely legal to consume content that was uploaded to the internet and then use it as inspiration to create your own works.

    • Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s covered by section 107 of the US copyright law, and is actually fine and protected as free use in most cases. As long as the work is a direct copy and instead changes the result to be something different.

      All parody type music is protected in this way, whether it’s new lyrics to a song, or even something less “creative” like performing the lyrics of song A to the melody and style of song B.

    • Gutless2615@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Taking other people’s creative works to create your own productive work is allowed if you are making a fair use. There’s a very good argument that use such as training a model on a work would be a fair use under the current test; being a transformative use, that replicates practically no actual part of the original piece in the finished work, that (arguably) does not serve as a replacement for that specific piece in the market.

      Fair use is the cornerstone of remix art, of fan art, of huge swathes of musical genres. What we are witnessing is the birth of a new technique based on remixing and unfortunately this time around people are convinced that fighting on the side of big copyright is somehow the good thing for artists.

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Thousands of hours of work on a project you completed being used by someone else to turn a profit, maybe even used in some way you vehemently disagree with, without giving you a dime is

      exactly how human culture progresses, and trying to stop it

      is unethical and needs regulation from that perspective.

    • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Taking other people’s creative works to create your own for-profit product is illegal in every way except when AI does it.

      wrong.