|
|
Post by Hobson on Aug 19, 2023 10:41:00 GMT -5
Trix are for kids. Copyrights are for humans. An AI song can't be copyrighted, at least for now.
|
|
Dub
Administrator
I'm gettin' so the past is the only thing I can remember.
Posts: 19,914 
|
Post by Dub on Aug 19, 2023 10:44:54 GMT -5
Well of course. You wouldn’t want people claiming ownership of songs they didn’t write themselves.
On edit: My remark was intended as humor. Many folk songs seem to have been copyrighted by people who didn’t write them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Aug 19, 2023 11:30:22 GMT -5
Interesting
|
|
|
|
Post by RickW on Aug 19, 2023 12:05:17 GMT -5
It’s all over the map, around the world. You can’t copyright AI produced artwork or prose in the US, either. At some point, there’s going to be a pile of legislation about all of this, and there are already lawsuits. One of the problems you run into is, what’s AI generated? AI has become a catchall term for anything computer generated, and what it is is not well defined in law. It’s shifted over the decades as well — Susan was doing AI work when we met in the late 80s. It’s just a much more capable algorithm now. But you could make the case that the Who song, Baba O’Riley, which had one of the first generated synth lines in music, is therefore AI, and that’s the 70s. Logic Pro has all kinds of generators in it, as does every other recording DAW, drums and midi. You’ve been able to write music without playing a note for a long time, and certainly, much of modern music has generated parts to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Aug 19, 2023 20:44:45 GMT -5
Cage's piece, 4'33", has had some interesting copyright twists.
|
|
