There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

AI Music Generator Suno Admits It Was Trained on ‘Essentially All Music Files on the Internet’

“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

can ,

It’s pretty obvious if you get specific with the tags. Especially with older styles where there’s less available trianing data.

Blackdoomax ,

Imagine the amount of data that is used to train facial recognition ia.

Fubarberry ,
@Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz avatar

There’s nothing stopping you from going to youtube, listening to a bunch of hit country songs there, and using that inspiration to write a “hit country song about getting your balls caught in a screen door”. That music was free to access, and your ability to create derivative works is fully protected by copyright law.

So if that’s what the AI is doing, then it would be fully legal if it was a person. The question courts are trying to figure out is if AI should be treated like people when it comes to “learning” and creating derivative works.

I think there are good arguments to both sides of that issue. The big advantage of ruling against AI having those rights is that it means that record labels and other rights holders can get compensation for their content being used. The main disadvantage is that high cost barriers to training material will kill off open-source and small company AI, guaranteeing that generative AI is fully controlled by tech giant companies like Google, Microsoft, and Adobe.

I think the best legal outcome is one that attempts to protect both: companies and individuals below a certain revenue threshold (or other scale metrics) can freely train on the open web, but are required to track what was used for training. As they grow, there will be different tiers where they’re required to start paying for the content their model was trained on. Obviously this solution needs a lot of work before being a viable option, but I think something similar to this is the best way to both have competition in the AI space and make sure people get compensated.

Evotech ,

Well, Microsoft started this line of argument recently æ. Makes sense others also adopt it

Passerby6497 ,

Oh, so when a ai company wants to use copyrighted works without permission or compensation it’s “fair use” but when I do it, it’s “piracy” and “I need to leave before the cops are called”.

NocturnalMorning , (edited )

Just tried it out out of curiosity. It does a good job, but the music is still boring.

NineMileTower ,

Say what you will, but “I Glued My Balls to My Butthole (Again)” fucking slaps.

gregor ,

Link please? For research purposes, of course.

EddoWagt ,

youtu.be/wPlOYPGMRws?si=Xu094G4Ta5HfeLKS

YouTube link

rigatti ,
@rigatti@lemmy.world avatar

Sadly I love that song. It resonates with my lived experience.

Dasnap ,
@Dasnap@lemmy.world avatar

I prefer ‘I Stink’.

Wispy2891 ,

Imagine how many years of prison would get an individual if he admitted in court to pirate tens of millions of music files in order to make a profit

hotpot8toe OP ,

I mean Suno is being sued by the record labels right now for this. We will see how much they have to pay if they lose

sunzu ,

I don't know if corpos will allow such dangerous precedent since all mega corps are guilty of this

_sideffect ,

Lmao, fair use… Fuck off with that in this case

sunzu ,

Its fair use when they take your labour, it is gulag when you play their song.

strawberry ,

they're right, they should absolutely be allowed to use and profit off of other peoples work that they spent decades learning and perfecting

(this is sarcasm in case you can't tell they're dumb as fuck for saying that shut this company down today pls)

snooggums ,
@snooggums@midwest.social avatar

If copyright had a reasonable duration, a huge chunk of that would have been public domain and not an issue.

archomrade ,

Abolish copyright.

AdamEatsAss ,

Why?

archomrade ,

Because it manufactures scarcity and causes us to repeatedly expend energy reproducing things that could be otherwise copied and enjoyed at near-zero cost.

We keep inventing silly rules in order to put off dealing with the existential threat our mode of production represents. “Copyright” is the first and silliest of those rules.

Telorand ,

I’m fine with copyright, provided it’s limited to only a few years and can’t ever be extended. This “lifetime of the author plus 50 years” shit is what makes it terrible.

tehWrapper ,
@tehWrapper@lemmy.world avatar

Great AI gets more rights than us too!

drmoose ,

You’re free to learn from any piece of music too. Whether AI is actually learning is still debatable but you have the same rights right now.

I’m still on the edge tbh I feel like it is learning and it is transformative but it’s just too powerful for our current copyright framework.

Either way, that’ll be such a headache for the transformative work clause of copyright for years to come. Also policing training would be completely unenforcable so any decision here would be rather moot in real world practice either way.

Willy ,

I think you’re allowed to listen to every song on the open internet too.

mrfriki ,

But not making business out of them.

Willy ,

You can make a business as soon as you’re done listening to them all.

credo ,

If you get an idea from a song, you are 1000% free to turn that into new art. This is the fair use argument.

Telorand ,

I agree with the logic, but I don’t think it should apply to LLMs—a humans-only law, if you will.

Quill7513 ,

But I’m not allowed to remix them. That’s the point that’s being made

Willy ,

It can’t remix either so that’s not an issue

Quill7513 ,

That’s the only thing it does.

pyr0ball ,

woosh

PerogiBoi ,
@PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca avatar

One has to pay a very high cost to do this. These AI companies did not pay. Why do AI companies get a pass on copyrighted material that the rest of us are getting sued, imprisoned, and fined for accessing?

Quill7513 ,

Lot of people flying in this thread to down vote people saying that these media companies live by a different set of rules than the rest of us without understanding that this AI model is basically a huge automated record scratching DJ that can only regurgitate things its heard before reassembled and presented as new. If any of us tried to do this same thing they’d sue our pants off for piracy and plagiarism. But when they do it it’s fine.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •