Dataset sources of musical generative AI

[gaggle of hermits]

See and that's what pi**es me off. If I take Steven Wilson's track and sample it into my own derivative kind of work, label has full rights to file a lawsuit against me.

we don't know if Steven Wilson and others are already preparing class action suits against udio etc.

this stuff takes time. if you feel strongly, I'd suggest emailing a link to Wilson's management company with a link to the example above. artists may well already be searching for examples like these and the pre-trial action in one of the suits against microsoft/openAi copilot has shown that one of the big overheads in cases like these is getting the AI to spit out obviously infringing examples that can be used in evidence. udio would have to establish that it didn't have Wilson's music in the training set in order to fend it off.

if you help the artists along a bit, that may be worthwhile.

[FarleyCZ]

Yo! Weaver! I know you hang around this forum, thanks for making a video on this topic! <3

Here's my 2 cents. What comes out of AI does not infringe copyright, because that's changed enough. But the actual act of creating the model does. That's where the theft happens. (Or you guys have seen any money from Suno or Udio? Not a cent.) And the consequences of that theft are huuuge, because instead of one human not purchasing your track, potentially thouands of them won't do that, because AI can generate something in your style then.

[mjolnir]

See and that's what pi**es me off. If I take Steven Wilson's track and sample it into my own derivative kind of work, label has full rights to file a lawsuit against me. Even if I don't make a dime with that track. But when somebody trains a machine on the same material, that machine spits out derivative works automatically, and they charge a monthly fee for that machine's service... all is perfectly legal.

I very much agree with you.