The rapid advancement of generative artificial intelligence is transforming the music industry, raising fundamental questions about creativity, authorship, and artistic value. While AI tools enable users to generate complete compositions from simple text prompts, they also introduce significant challenges regarding copyright infringement, compensation for human musicians, and the proliferation of synthetic tracks on streaming platforms. As machine-generated music becomes increasingly sophisticated, artists and industry leaders are grappling with the ethical, legal, and cultural implications of separating human emotion and lived experience from musical creation.
- Generative AI tools allow users to instantly create full-length songs across diverse genres using basic text prompts.
- Artists and record labels have raised intellectual property concerns over AI models trained on copyrighted recordings without permission or compensation.
- The influx of AI-generated content on streaming services poses risks to artist discovery and royalty distribution for human musicians.
- Ethical debates center on whether AI can replicate genuine artistic expression or if it reduces music to commercial data patterns.
- Lawmakers and music industry stakeholders are working to establish regulatory frameworks and transparency standards for AI-assisted music production.
DW News is a global news TV program broadcast by German public state-owned international broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW).
AllSides Media Bias Rating: Center
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/deutsche-welle-media-bias
Official website: https://www.dw.com
Original video here.
This summary has been generated by AI.
If you like or are even moved by an AI-generated song, does it matter to you that a human didn't create it?
We must find a way to identify when a human artist's work is used in the AI training or output content itself AND a system that compels royalty and licensing fees go to the originating artists. Similar to how songwriting and publishing credits, and mechanical royalties are currently distributed.
Yeah let's just make everything easy to do and require no skill nor preparation. And when we have accomplished that we will also have accomplished removal of all satisfaction from the activity. Hey, here's a marketable thing: let's just find a way to do the fluid removal without the messy process of having an actual orgasm. It's a good analogy. It accomplishes the biological task more efficiently. Isn't that the same with music? After all, we've (until the digital age, unless you want to count player pianos) always used biology to produce music. So now we can bypass that. Maybe those who are creating music solely using AI prompts should really just be… well, you know.
Electronic music was founded based on samplers but synthesizers, some few really impactful ones like the tb 303 from roland that acid house was based on for example. That one sentence kind of undermines the rest of what he says, since the rest is also kind of full of logical fallacies.
Amazing!!!👍🤩
Don’t use stolen data to make art.
The difference is AI replaces all the need for competence and sadly talent. You no longer need to be able to sing or play any instrument in order to create a hit song. Music will lose its soul and meaning, it will be simply organized noise.
Mark Mulligan speaks with the voice of reason. He acknowledges that there are those who have no respect for copyright, but at the same time, there are many grey areas which we have already transgressed with older technology which was considered acceptable, so the ultimate consideration will be a hybrid result, not simply all or nothing. I love his Jimi Hendrix / Lenny Kravitz analogy.
I can imagine years from now, there'll be A.I. music artists suing other music artists for using their prompts or A.I. generation techniques!
AI music challenges the gate keepers of the past…
stop calling it AI… it is VI… AI doesnt exist and "news" agencies like yours are at fault for a large part that this nonsense goes on… people are mad at AI, love AI, hate AI but none of them ever met an AI… BECAUSE IT DOESNT EXIST… jfc you really got the clowshoes on people… its virtual intelligence…. learn defintions instead of corpo slang…
What's wrong with ai signing your songs for you
The gentleman is off the mark !
Midi inputs have still to be performed into the DAW.
The creative aspect doesn’t change whether it is performed on an instrument or input by hand.
It’s also clearly noticeable and for the final polished product, replaced by actual musicians.
Ai is on a different footing.
His last argument about letting people unleash their creativity is absolute nonsense !
Creativity is when you join an arts class and get paint on your hands – not prompt a painting on your laptop.
Ai music is an issue as it hides behind actual musicians and steals their money.
It fundamentally stands on a different footing to prompting a painting for your social media account.
A IA pode ser útil na música, desde que seja usada como assistente!
I read "sparked" i knew i was in the AI scene… Btw. Thats my kind of comedy to use one of the most overused AI words in the title 😀
IMO, if you can perform LIVE and achieve 90% of the released single, it's fine. This covers the auto-tuning as well, which I feel is worse than AI instrumentals.
I'm just happy that this fear mongering is not new, and that over the years technology prevailed.
AI creativity can and must NOT replace human, period. It should be a possibility to choose if you want to see/hear AI, well aware that that product is AI-generarted.
AI can still create it. Question is who performs
Human creativity? We humans don’t yet accept just how AI we’ve become. For better or worse, I fear we’re more and more a monolith with a shared singular imagination.
Australia bans everything, I know from first hand experience. In this case, I support it.
Here's a suggestion: Strip the "AI" of all of it's Training Data (AKA stolen Intellectual Property from all of the artists in the Training Set), and then let it try to create a song. This is yet another amoral power grab by the Tech Bros ramming something through society under lax/non-existent government regulation, and asking us to enjoy having our own work sold back to us.
How much is AI or isn’t AI is not the point. AI is insidious. That’s why old recordings and vinyls and cds are making a come back. Remastering old rock songs and turning it into a wall of sound is already a disaster.
Australia has a horrible reputation regarding copyrights. Ever heard of an outfit called World News? Copy the VHS tapes and resell it in your own stores. Forget paying the publishers/producers who made it in the first place. What we should expect from the prison colony.
MIDI drives the performance. Not the composition.
Some genres place a higher emphasis on performance than others…
What AI does is to degenerate human creations. The longterm implications for the collective cultural good are nothing short of mutilating…
I don't think Mark Mulligan understands how AI works or is trained. LLMs are NOT silicon based life forms. Such a foolish thing to say. Generative models trained on copyright is NOT analogous to some kid inpsired by Jimi Hendrix.
Useless conversation. No one knows where the red line is because it's purely subjective. Artists have a knee jerk reaction to it because it takes away their livelihoods. Humans are not that original, and the personality and creativity that is supposedly unique to them is actually just a combination of experiences, starting attributes, and pure dumb luck that AI can also have.
Just roll with it. Let go. Jump in. Embrace it. The future is here and we cant stop it. The music and film industries are a farce anyway, they just want to have control. (Regulate, Control, Enforce). Why cling onto last century. It's like banning music that was created using electricity. Inhale the future – exhale the past.
The future of AI is dangerous. Dementia and mental stupidity. Human creativity is very important
Calling a song with millions of listeners AI slop won’t help, pandoras box is open. Just ditch copyright protection laws completely and ensure alternative income streams for artists that exclude the big music industry labels and platforms.
The question at the premise of this interview is redundant… Australia and this sense should be an example for the rest of the world. Also seemingly off topic but the way the Australian Onnes handle the mobile phone and social media epidemic among children is also spot on this should be recognise by the rest of the world as being the standard.
It's unfortunate that you left the last word to the guy who's promoting the tech built on massive piracy from artist, while missing the point about who owns the AI slop music. Really bad interviews all around.
Thesis: if ai is banned form the charts, the charts are gonna become irrelevant
Music charts should ban English named and English speaking music in EU, because we have not a single country that speaks primary English here. Else this move is just to protect existing American music monopoly.
Neither the expert nor the reporter know what they are talking about. Alternatively they are deliberately misleading the public in favour of ai. You enjoy your automated slop; art and creativity will always find a way.
Germany, not a single show you had on television, out of 10000 music shows, they all been playback and English. Madonna also didn't sing live when she started. It's playback, computer made, producer made. What are you smoking? Go educate a little.
The more I hear and see ai, the less Îm impressed 😢
Dont conflate stolen data vulgar grubby ai to the larger scientific field
Samplers had no stolen data out of the box.
11:33 – I am strongly against putting all AI-generated music under a generalized label such as "AI slop." Hey, how about the tons of Human slop out there ???!!!!…. There is a lot of great, perfectly sounding AI music out there. Go and find it! Be active listeners, and not passive ones!…….
Before you train a monster in the future, every dataset should be cleared for true open source clearances or acknowledged as a commercial token renumeration
How these horrific beats can be a hit? They just destroy the song. People who listen to those songs and think it is good, are the major problem.