Remember Venus Theory who did the demo song for Cubase 11? Here he explains how AI Copyright is stealing people’s music, along with a pretty good explanation of how copyright works in the digital age.
AI Copyright Claimed My Last Video
1 Like
Also just found this reaction to the same video by a copyright lawyer, who gives more explanation and insight.
I have tried Suno and it makes imo good sounding music. But I have heard that it sometimes makes plagiaristic songs
I would like an ai music making app which was not so independent. A app which could be used more as a helper instead. Suno at least makes almost all decisions itself
Hi @SF_Green ,
absolutely - something HAS to be done in terms of copyright and AI. I am a glass half full person but with AI and the way it is handled it is difficult to keep a positive attitude. The current state of copyright is threatening music as an art form on more than just one level!
2 Likes
Indeed. However, I think the first step is to make sure the actual subject matter is defined first. What those videos discuss, and the subject of “AI copyright” are two VERY different things.
First off, Royalty Free doesn’t necessarily mean it’s “free to use,” nor does It Imbue the consumer with any copyright privileges. In fact, the copyright holder still owns the copyright. Sure, he could use that content “for free” in his video, but he’s using copyrighted material, so that’s rather obvious. You should note that VT actually misrepresented the content by clicking the “does not not contain any other copyrighted material” checkbox (as admitted). Additionally, when he says he “copyright violated himself” he also “lied” to the content distribution service by saying the “alternate account” wrote all the the music himself (which he also did on purpose), and indeed “ALL the sounds” himself, which was clearly not true. If you want to say “he was himself” you can, but it actually worked as it should have.
So, so far, nothing is actually “wrong.” He used copyrighted material, lied about it, and got a YouTubed copyright claim against the video as a result of YouTube’s terms of service and the contract HE agreed to. This SHOULD happen, kind of.
However, YouTube’s TOS and the EULA have NOTHING to do with the “copyright law” being claimed. The claim was a YouTube TOS, NOT some “legal copyright claim.” The fact that the “Top Music Lawyer” thought that was a DMCA take-down request is mind-boggling to me. VT did NOT receive a DMCA takedown request, YouTube did NOT issue one, and the copyright holder did not initiate one. If the “attorney” doesn’t’ know that, then they shouldn’t be making videos (in my opinion). After seeing such a profoundly ignorant response from the “top attorney,” I stopped watching the lawyer video.
There is already copyright law that states AI cannot hold copyright. Specifically, that only a human can. But that’s not what SUNO is doing. SUNO owners own the copyright of the music YOU (the “royal” you) generate because YOU give it to them when you use the service. You can pay for a different membership where you still retain it, but you have to do that. If you use the Suno “stem splitting” free service, you GIVE THEM full, joint copyright of every bit of that music and they can do whatever they want with it.
None of that has anything to do with copyright law, specifically. It has to do with the TOS and EULA you agree to with the content service, which is a different manner of law.
The “solution” is don’t publish content on YouTube, and don’t use Suno or other platforms where you give up your rights. I did notice that I had to watch 8 different commercials in the 24 minute video, so the platform was doing what it was designed to do, right? He’s got a million views on it which put around $15,000 in his pocket.
I only bring this up because the original video, nor the “lawyer” video, actually had anything (as far as I got on the lawyer vid) to applicable copyright law.
The argument that “the only way to resolve this is to take people to court” is thus equal to “there is no enforcement” is specious at best. Legal remedies absolutely exist. That’s like saying “The lines at the Mississippi DMV are long and takes forever. Therefore, it is impossible to legally drive in Mississippi.” Not a great (or accurate) claim.
3 Likes
Simply put. You use an AI company to write music for you, that music does not belong to you, the recording doesn’t belong to you, the masters don’t belong to you, nothing about this song belongs to you.
I wouldn’t touch AI for creative reasons or to produce a finalised product, with a long stick.
It’s too unregulated, too uncertain, too dodgy.
4 Likes
Thank you. As you’ve pointed out, the author of the video makes a living making videos that people watch online. Highly ironic.
Of course not!! The whole point of being creative is to be creative.
3 Likes