This was honestly very eye opening for me as I had NO CLUE generative music had gotten this "good" over the last year or so! In my head I thought it would take much longer and be a much harder task for generative AI to be able to output music that didn't sound like randomly generated nonsense, and seeing it stealing copywritten material 1 for 1 in so many of these examples is really shocking. It was something I was completely oblivious to so I didn't really "worry" about and I thank you and SMM for bringing this to the public. I have absolutely no clue what our options are as songwriters and producers honestly, these large corporations have shown that when there is money to be made they will put all morals to the side and happily screw over the people who are going to suffer from it the most. Thank you again DJ Pain great video!
The problem is these things allow too many non-artistic people to enter into these spaces and they rely heavily on these "tools" because they had no artistic integrity to begin with.
@@ghost-user559 no stupid. daws n synth softs made it affordable for musicians who wanna create that didnt have rich ass parents to give them 10k to buy 1 keyboard or 1 beat machine. we still had to put in the 10,000 hours to learn these programs n we could still connect midi keyboards to play. world of a difference from having ai tools make the music for u.
@@unknwngamer1 You are telling me it didn’t create 50 million “type beat drill rap” fruity loops channels that spam a hundred million loops they stole off of splice too?
@@ghost-user559 no thats not what u said. u tried to say becuz of tools like daws is why music became more simpler n thats incorrect. there will always be people in any industry that just join in n try to make a quick buck off a growing trend. its inescapable.
@unknwngamer1, You completely missed the point of his argument. DAWs, VST’s, Chord Tools, Guitar Riff Tools, and even synths increase the automation of music production. The irony is that after not being to follow the basic argument you levied a childish insult against someone’s intelligence.
The reason why these producers are defending AI is because it’s yet another short cut to create music. They can do less work and create more tracks. They are digging their own graves because the legal headaches are coming.
Glad you found my video interesting! I def agree that we're all in this together and here's what I think we can all do right now to make a difference: just speak out. Make videos, posts, blogs, etc. talking about these issues and how artists and producers feel about it. If artists and producers tell their fans they're not cool with certain AI companies, that can help steer us in a more ethical direction.
Yeah, put any producer tag into Suno and it will spit it out. I cackled when it said DAMN SON WHERE'D YOU FIND THIS when I pasted some XXXtentacion lyrics in. It's a neat tool, but I'm starting to get a little worried.
Technically, if you read the Terms of Service, you are not supposed to do so or input anything you don't have the right to, including lyrics. I'm sure they will put some safeguards in as it progresses.
@@dprice2800 So Udio and Suno Have to sue the Labels and others for breaking terms and service and input copyright material. I guess China and spotify will go straight to consumer with the new music industry😂
@@dprice2800 typing something like ‘another one’ doesn’t violate copyright law. Typing is ‘mellow trap’ doesn’t either. And yet the output of both, as seen in the original video, is full of blatantly copyrighted sound recordings
I have nothing of value to add really but mostly commenting for the algo - I am producing music only as a hobby for the love of it so I could safely carry on with the traditional way of doing things not having to worry about paying bills, but still, thinking about the direction everything is taking with sites like Suno or AI replacement in general is a big downer. Specially if it pushes producers who actually dared to try making a living out of it aside. I would hate to see that. Thanks for speaking up DJ Pain and everyone else who does.
I had a feeling that Suno was a little suspicious on the side that we have to feed the AI with information, and it's obvious where it's coming from. I'm glad that I don't just trust/use these things without looking into the TAC's and Privacy policies, etc because they'll tell you in their own words what they're doing. Thanks for the vid Pain!
It's Fair Use for transformative use: AI doesn’t store or replicate the original songs it learns old patterns and structures then generates new ones. AI could never be a threat to real artists like me because AI has no creativity and never will. Since AI is reassembling and remixing patterns and styles learned from past works, AI is bound by the boundaries of what has already been created. AI will never be Innovative. This is just going to be a passing trend that will last a few years, but AI will make an excellent tool for real artists. Imagine making a beat from scratch and having AI analyze your patterns giving you different options you can use to generate bridges or switch ups with ease. Imagine instead of quantizing you let AI adjust the pattern slightly in different ways the possibilities are endless!!
AI might cause frustration or even job loss, but that doesn’t make it illegal. Just like you can’t copyright a groove or style (Blurred Lines case wrongly implied otherwise), you can’t stop AI from learning patterns in copyrighted music-people have done this forever. The real issue, and the upcoming lawsuits, are about how companies are getting the music to train on, not AI generating new material. That said, AI using a producer's tag (an iconic brand element that can cause a likelihood of confusion or affect income) crosses a line and shouldn’t be legal. Guess what, we already have laws against that-same with using copyrighted melodies. You can’t copyright patterns or techniques, whether human or AI-driven. The backlash comes from people upset that AI is faster than what took them years to learn (or not understanding the tech). But we don’t make laws based on feelings. AI is a tool-adapt or get left behind.
@@DJPain1 Well articulated, thank you. ;) The only clear copyright violation you’ve provided is AI reproducing a producer’s tag, which is definitely illegal. Beyond that, there’s no concrete proof or real understanding of how AI works, and no examples of AI-generated music violating copyright. Claims like AI being a “modern-day sampling machine” or extracting value from artists are emotional and speculative, without solid technical backing. Feel free to call me names, but you can’t say I don’t understand the tech or the threat it poses to musicians. My music will be the first to lose profit-it’s already happening. Two things can be true at once: 1. It sucks. 2. It's not illegal. This is like past tech fears, such as synths or the printing press. However, today’s tech is moving faster. There’s no stopping the AI train-not just in music. I’m not naive enough to think it’s all good, but neither you, me, nor your highly productive laugh emojis are going to stop it.
I've been playing around with Suno just making instrumental stuff to chop up, theme songs for my dog, goofy songs about poop. I've once had it randomly generated a weird voicemail massage at the end of one, but nothing that sounded recognizable like a tag verbatim. But even if you type a long ass prompted it will simplify it down, so for dude to say "all he typed in was mellow trap" is more likely than not a little inaccurate. But I do agree with the sentiment and find it to be quite odd it could get that close if not trying to. And, when it comes to the "custom mode" I can only assume a person could manipulate it to go way further in any direction they want than it would in the normal generator. All in all, does feel a little concerning, but how much of this being manipulated to feel more of a widespread phenomenon. Now I have no reason to doubt the guy, but I have trust issues haha, so when the guy says 7 out of the 10 tacks had the tag, all I can think about is it would be incredibly easy to delete ones in-between than didn't have a tag to further prove his point, so his video would hit harder. News outlets do it all the time, information is secondary to engagement, and it's not a conversation so even if there is inaccuracies and falsehoods, once the next topic/story/video drops we all move on. A.i. is a tool, when miss used shit can get a little screwy, like use a car for transportation, it's all good... use a car as a battering ram, not so much haha.
Yep and real producers are fighters who recognize that this is a serious legal and ethical problem. They don’t just smugly shrug; they respect music and musicians.
All respect, great convo. I wont justify the use of it. Interesting cause i was the "i wont use splice. Make all my samples" person (past 5yrs) Invested into instruments > Vsts Ive gotten Mind Blowing / Genre bending crazy ai resilts. not being lazy, Evolving my style beyond the A.I. But my obsession to improv my craft, is a different beast then the Music Business. The ethics you bring up is a Needed conversation, the Jukebox ai project also sourced copyrighted material.
I totally agree, you are 100% on point. The elephant in the room hiding behind the artist and content ripoff debate is the amount of server juice, electricity, and emissions these models are pumping. If AI is revolutionary and a good thing then why are more resources not being put towards solving environmental collapse? It's a beeds for land story.
With the art AI, the reason they sometimes are able to reproduce something is because they have a lot of examples in the training data of the same thing. Eg. there will have been a ton of images of The Mona Lisa, so it sees that as a set pattern, in the same way it knows what a dog or a cat is meant to look like. This is probably why producer tags are able to be replicated in the music AIs - the tag appears many times in the training data as it's on every beat that producer does, so the AI sees it as a common pattern, in the same way it knows what "house beat", "sad chord progression" is, etc. It just doesn't know tags are specific copyrighted elements, rather than more general commonly-used elements like types of rhythms/sounds.
@@DJPain1 Sorry, I didn't make my point clear - my explanation was for why the music AI can generate the tags even though it does not contain any actual audio data. It is the same with the art AI. This is where the lawsuits so far have run into difficulties - the models don't contain any actual copies of the copyrighted material. In the art case, the AI companies have said they definitely used copyrighted material, but they bring up the "Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc." case as precedent for fair use covering this. I'm not saying this is good or bad btw, my overall point here is that the art case and the ChatGPT case provide a lot of info into how these AI lawsuits are playing out.
This all is so much on point and adds up. It's a problem. The same way music creators complain about Spotify is the same way it will be with these AI companies. The record companies will find a way to get paid somewhere down the line. We really need to stick together on this and find a way to protect ourselves. If not the services of the creators will no longer be relevant. Hell, we already have the monster looking at us eye to eye. Time to choose sides. 👀
I am a big fan of the channel. Keep up the good work. However; I slightly disagree with you on this one. Let me explain. It's either we're going to accept the use of AI to replace ANY musician, producer, singer, rapper, songwriter, and beat maker or we're not. BUT WE CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! Meaning, I cannot say it is OK to use AI for vocals (Because I can't sing or rap), but it is NOT OK to use AI to make beats or musical productions, BECAUSE I MAKE BEATS AND IM A PRODUCER! That is called HYPOCRISY!
Exactly! Just like producers are shortcutting on vocals so they don’t have to hire a vocalist. Vocalists are shortcutting on producers so they don’t have to buy beats. I understand his point where suno went wrong is not knowing about the producer tags. They probably don’t have someone who understands IP rights and licensing in their data training team.
Using “AI” (DSP) for roughing vocals for a song you personally wrote (you wrote the melody) because you can’t sing is no different than using a guitar VST and a keyboard controller because you can’t play guitar. At issue here is entire complete tracks (sans lyrics) being algorithmically generated.
@@ckatheman Before the synthesizer, you needed a full band in the studio to play drums, bass, guitar, piano, percussion, etc. Plus if you wanted a brass section, you needed to bring in at least 1 trumpet player, a saxophonist, and a trombone player. Don't let me even start talking about 1st & 2nd violins, violas, cellos, and double bases for string sections. The bottom line and the truth is for decades now, all these instruments can be played by ONE MAN, IN A BEDROOM STUDIO, USING SAMPLES, ON A KEYBOARD! Why don't we talk about the tens of thousands of session musicians from around the world that were put out of work because of this??? The moral of the story is that IT IS POINTLESS TO FIGHT AGAINST TECHNOLOGY.
I've got people arguing with me because humans had to input the words. It's about the notes and rhythm being used with the words. If I take the words in these tags and input them into a text to voice app the output will sound nothing like the tag despite using the exact same words. The fact that this is happening with the tags shows that the same thing is happening with the music.
I think a lot of us who lived through the 2010s music producer boom, and have been a part of it have seen this before with splice. but its why we're worried about it. Its not about the fact that we can choose, its the fact that a customer can choose. It used to take some kind of know how to at least put splice loops together, now it takes a text prompt to get a whole song. why as a company, with a budget, would you pay someone for music, when you can just generate it? Thats the fear, its not about authenticity or aging out of relevance, its the fact that we're allowing ourselves to be replaced
@@DJPain1 The piracy is a different point from what I was making, i was more stating that the fact that they're using real material to train these ai, feels similar to when splice was introduced. Progress is not a bad thing, and it's not to call splice samples lazy (i use them all the time) it just feels like one more 'convenience' that lowers the entry point of music, down to a text prompt. that's what scares me.
Won't ever be sufficient outlet for millions of tracks AI will be creating. Its biggest market and selling point to non musical users will be intentionally creating vocals and tracks that sound like known artists.
Exactly… you can’t just take people’s music that they worked so hard on and make it available for people to use without any kind of permission! 😤 I’ve been following Jesse since 2017 and he’s been doing a great job investigating this matter! 💪
Honestly if a producer needs to use any sort of AI during production as a “tool” they’re just not as good a producer. I truly don’t understand the desire to integrate this into music. We make music to connect with each other on a different level. What connection is being made when the audio was auto generated instead of by a human soul? I believe with all my being there is not an AI platform in my lifetime that can compete with me or other producers who truly care for their craft like you pain.
Simple People want music This AI stuff makes music at a high enough level that it passes Producers wanna make money or need to pay the bills. And we view music as a product to be consumed Rather than artistic expression Then there’s also a question about technology and its impact on music. Like beat making before computers was a tideois process but it sure added a certain texture to the final product. By accident most likely. Does non computer music feel like more or really music ?
@@quesostuff1009 that’s the thing. I don’t view music as a product to be consumed. All I care about is the expression. The ai doesn’t make anything that passes yet, not even close.
I stopped using it after hearing about this a bit ago. It also made a track that sounded like an artist that no longer makes music and I thought it was odd as that was a unique EDM style. This type of thing is going to happen due to the amount of training data required to make such a model so these companies are definitely stealing and infringing on copyright to make the "AI". They don't store information while creating the "AI" but they are trained off of stolen music so output they produce is likely to be similar, also the web application does store data and probably recycles it for refining the model so to speak but that has been shown to produce worse results when done incorrectly. I think you have a great grasp of the underlying technology. Whoever said that you did not understand should also understand the inventors of the models these "AI" are based on barely grasp the full picture of the technology as it's created by teams usually not individuals. As for a solution I do think these places like suno and udio need to be held accountable for the blatant copyright theft, I am unsure the major labels have our best interest in mind though. Thank you for the great content keep it up.
@@C12omega absolutely. Piracy was black and white; this is piracy but with no accountability, hundreds millions of dollars of funding and complicity from its victims
@DJPain1 Respect to you, sir, for featuring video with Jesse Josefson aka Sync My Music. He's a really good guy & he's built up a great community in terms of how to get into & thrive in the Sync Licensing space, especially in the era of AI. May YOU continue to have success in ALL of your own endeavors, ALWAYS. Peace & blessings. 🙏🏽
There's vst outs that actually make some really good melodies , so it probably won't be long until full ai beats start sounding great too. Trap beats are so robotic and perfectly quantized anyways so ai could make those already no problem. It's not like a human can play triplet hi hats live anyways. But if we're talking timbo level drum patterns I don't see ai being able to replicate producers with unique rhythms
Would this video be a thing if the AI did not add the tags ? It feels like the video wants a make a larger point of the AI integration in beat making but keeps pointing back to the tag usage (which def can be programmed out of these AI models )
@@quesostuff1009 how are you missing the obvious point that these platforms are built on theft, that their developers have been lying and that the implications of this are incredibly grave?
Ai music was entertaining several weeks ago, now it’s become a major problem. Some super slick entertainment attorney needs to take this to Washington : DC , and present this to committee. I have zero faith in Government, but something needs to get on paper about this. You, DJ Pain, would hold up well in front of those committee individuals. A civil suit, for the world wide individuals, creative artists, musicians is in violation of this theft of copyright and intellectual property. I myself, or anyone, are in chains afraid to publicly release any new music, in fear that “they” will steal and recycle it as theirs. Humans are given gifts of creativity. This is an attack on mankind as human individuals.
So Michael Winslow is guilty of sampling? th-cam.com/video/swT69QkcZ8I/w-d-xo.html It's called a forgery when it is an identical work, but not a direct copy. The tag needed to be prompted for, so who created it? A forgery requires that it be passed off as the original. Who is saying it is the producer tag? The user is liable. Also the training step to prevent forgeries has a hole.
I've been using AI for my beats for a few months now but let me be very specific: what I mean by using is have AI spit out some random chord progression (which took me a long time to get right using prompts) and then interpolating the whole thing and chopping it up...I basically use it when I'm super uninspired but I always re-record what I'm getting using my own instruments cause yeah, it just sounds trash...honestly, I'm a lot faster creating loops from scratch because prompting takes a long time
Yeah I think when they listen to various songs, they will think the watermarks are part of the music .. I had some funny experience with trance watermarks being vaguely present when I used saturation on it etc.. it didn't seem intentional again I don't think there is any flagrant violations going on, just incidental when certain songs over saturate the sources or have too high a weighting on specific words. IMO they should just content ID all the output and be done with it. There is nothing wrong with the technology it is just that they can't really judge accidental output that is similar. Again I think the intent is totally transformative use not derivative use.
A specific aspect of ai production that I see very little comment about is = how good the production is. Compression, Limiting, EQ, Leveling etc. those things are very time consuming and require expensive hardware or software.
AI is probably even a lot better than they have released to the public. I'm still waiting for Google music sandbox to be released. When you make a demo beat or upload a sample to the input feature the AI can make some pretty wild sounding music. This is not going away.
With Udio and Suno you can upload somebody's else's beat that has a tag in it and if you write the words to that tag in the lyric box it can very well say it with the same vocal. I've done remixes of songs by uploading a snippet of the original song and pasting the lyrics from the song.
Which shows that these platforms are just taking material and spitting it back out, NOT transforming it. Thereby eliminating their "fair use doctrine" defense.
@@DJPain1 When you upload something to the sites you have to answer a question that you own the rights. The AI thinks you own the right so they just try to improve what you've uploaded. It's over for the old days of producing music. It's pretty much over for humans recording music. The only thing humans will do is play live and cover AI songs.
@@DJPain1 I made this instrumental just by uploading a snippet of a sample from an obscure song. It's only going to get better. th-cam.com/video/sxTfi0gMCB4/w-d-xo.htmlfeature=shared
@@DJPain1They already have the full legal precedent for training not violating copyright whatsoever and its well entrenched and established. Training an ai has zero to do with the output from a legal standpoint. There is no “fair use doctrine defense” in the real world. The reality is that a dataset can be copyrighted, and the output is on the user. You can break every copyright that exists using a piano or a DAW right? Do we ban pianos and DAWs or do we hold the end user accountable? The law doesn’t blame the instruments, it blames the person willingly not doing their due diligence.
It’s sharing a data file for the ability for Ai to replicate. Totally illegal under copyright laws Period , what’s next copying people in a movie scene or a video game No this needs to stop now.
It’s not illegal whatsoever. It’s morally wrong. It isn’t illegal. If people just keep repeating what they wish was true than nothing is going to change. There is already precedent for zero ability to stop training with copyrighted works. It’s not considered infringement. What is infringing is the end user putting out a track that has legitimately copyrighted elements. The training is all just optics and them trying to sound friendly, because they already know it’s 100% allowed for them to train on anything they want.
How is this possible? First, AI does not STORE music. AI converts music into data, analyzes and stores patterns in the data, then strings patterns together to make music. YES AI is trained on copyrighted music. YES you can FORCE an AI to reproduce a vocal tag by typing in that tag (that's what the producer did). But arguments about "what humans do" aside, that's the basic process. That's how this is possible.
Definitely feel some kinda way about AI and these companies that have decided to use the Arts as their testing ground. One way to pushback towards this disruption, is if there was a Union that could unilaterally speak for all of us, Big and small, on music related matters like the Movie industry has. Or at least spreading awareness as you are doing and a number of others on youtube is the best next thing. What is actually needed is something that I dunno if it exists, and that is a code or a program that can SOURCE BACK to the AI training sources itself. I know that tech exists to detect when a sample or beat was taken from it's original user into a newer work. Ideally, that would be one way to combat what's going on with AI prompt-generated companies like Udio & Suno, is to create a software/program that could scour their database of music to determine how EXACTLY they trained their AI to learn how to produce the song. It's funny, because I remember when I had to write a college paper; you're expected to cite your references at the end of the paper. However, these companies are producing and SELLING works without ANY citation DESPITE it's clear that they have not created them on their own. AND, worse yet, they are taking CREDIT from others without showing the prerequisite citation; otherwise known as plagiarism. With this new technology, we're experiencing the musical form of plagiarism. However, it seems that way too many are okay with this?! I'm not. This is not cool at all. And before I end my rant (this obviously hit a nerve here) I think that the fact producer tags are getting discovered within their database indicates that part of their "training of AI" included taking music ALL OVER the internet without their permission. Which dovetails to what Mustafa Suleyman, Microsoft's AI boss, declared that anything & everything on the web is "freeware". Unbelievable
@@DJPain1 that's a damn shame, there's some amazing stuff that's made without using libraries of others music. Willful ignorance just makes you sound ill informed on the topic. ✌️
Might be trash now, but technology advances everyday. AI putting everybody out of business. I wish I can hop in a time machine and go back to the good ole days.
AI is garbage. It can't create unless it has something to copy from. Then it puts it together in the most shittiest of ways. Even with advancements it will just regurgitate what was already made.
im not worried about ai. making music is about inventing or innovating. regarding copyrights, i'll let the courts handle that. nobody should be using ai output as the final output anyway since its unoriginal.
Jesus. I already hated AI... Here's the thing. AI can help in a lot of different ways- setting "presets" based on your mix and not just randomly is one that comes to mind. The only thing I think we can do is what I've been doing- keep on working, and when possible speak out against AI (and specifically generative ai). I've been trying to think of ways to protect from my music being used to feed AI. I'm not against AI at all, but generative ai is what I'm against. People supporting this tech are supporting the death of creativity. Period. It happened with AI visual art- but now we're seeing the fully ai generated stuff kind of fall a little and we're starting to see more artists incorporating AI elements into their art. Now I know that the labels are going to be doing different shit with AI, but I think for the producers and artists and all of the unrepresented people in the industry, we'll end up doing what the visual art community is doing now- using AI as PART of our workflow. IDK if I'm delusional or if my optimism will help, but it's literally the only thing that's keeping me working and not forcing me in bed 24/7 depressed as hell.
@@BerkmanHouse this is a big waste of my time. here's an example: the statement "I'm loving it" is just words. If I input those words into an AI, and the exact Macdonalds jingle comes out, that proves they are inputting and outputting copyrighted material, thus violating federal law. If I input the words, "Cash money AP" and the output is the exact copyrighted master recording in the same voice, cadence and with the same delay effect on it, not even a toddler on a sugar crash would miss the obvious blatant theft. Additionally, the input didn't include "cash money ap" as the lyrics. The output did. You missed that as well. This was a total waste of my time.
Hear me out bro! Music = MATH and AI = Infinitely better and FASTER at MATH than any human being on Earth! So is it that impossible for you to believe that even though there's some issues with it *RIGHT NOW* it's only a matter of time before AI will easily kick out instrumentals that are just as good *IF NOT BETTER* than the top producers of today!
Hard to understand your position. Fight it? Use It? Condemn it? It sounds somewhat contradictory. I study AI. Some of it is rather good. It should be because it learns for a solid database of a large percentage of what people have already done. I don't think it's good for creativity. Sure, it's here but should it be if it's just scavenges other's work. I do agree that the lawsuit likely won't benefit artists, composers, musicians, and producers that much.
I don't like the results I've gotten from Suno. But Udio is incredible. I like using Udio. I don't use it as a crutch, and I can definitely see AI beats as possibly being a "Trojan Horse" of sorts. I personally don't have a problem with Udio....Suno is a different story. But I also don't have a problem with producers that don't choose to use ai in their productions. However, in all actuality, most people that make beats are doing it for fun, whether realized or not. Suno knows that. A huge number of those tracks will never see the light of day. Btw, I didn't address the theft aspect as it goes without saying that it's wrong.
AI will only get better in depth and quality. Don't underestimate its potential to completely disrupt... amongst others, the music industry. 2) AI scraping the internet to learn is no different than a human guitarist listening and learning from Hendrix... so long as UDIO or SUNO output unique material that Shazam doesnt recognize... Like it or not, its not a copyright violation. So the choice is simple to me: 1) adapt or 2) be anti-AI and brag about being a purist... But most listeners dont care how the sausage is made... Just sayin..
If they put it on there, then, it’s illegal for a service provider to speak for a third party service provider, such as a water mark removal engineer, even if it’s their tag, they must have forfeited their AI generated prompt, or, people will quickly realize what Dolby Atmos is for. Otherwise, people have just been picking royalty free loops to cheaply stitch together and fraudulently register. Regardless, it puts people in check, to have to answer to these things. Lol
My entire channel is music I've been making with AI. This is just the world we live in now. The people scared are those who are too prideful to adapt and see change as scary (as a lot of humans generally do, especially big change that happens fast). I'm SOOO thankful I'm not so simple minded that big change scares me.... in fact it has the opposite effect, getting me excited for new possibilities.
If something is too good to be true… it probably is 😂 I cannot predict the future, but the idea that anyone can generate AI songs with the click of a button, make them popular, and EARN A LIVING from them seem like bs. There will be lawsuits, and over saturation.
@@seaofroses8888 I wonder if we will ever get to that "click of a button" music. I know anti-AI people want to pretend that day is now....but it just isn't yet (unless you are doing pure instrumental low-fi stuff haha). Making good songs from gen AI right now takes me like 8 hours per song (and I have to write the lyrics, since AI lyrics are still nonsense). Still a lot faster for the type of music it is than traditional music. But actually earning a living? That is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT world. That is the slow long grind of marketing and building an audience for consistent work. No one is making a random handful of songs from AI and making a living at it lol. The world isn't so simple.
@@Shyeep I’m being realistic, the one click may not be now, but it’s only gonna get faster. As far as producing a song yourself, good experienced producers can definitely make a song in was less than 8 hrs. I am wondering what you are trying to do. If you yourself don’t see financially profit as a prospect, and you are also not an artist(aside from the witting) what is the point? 😂
@@seaofroses8888 Oh, that is easy. I am an artist, and I do have hopes of financial profit in the future :) I'm actually already a successful artist in another medium. So coming to music is just a continuation of the creative fire that is me haha. But the thing about building a career in anything is more than just the product you create. It's about the slog of marketing and building an audience..... Sadly there are a lot of people out there with dreams that would rather hang around BSing on reddit and twitter than actually putting in the work doing anything to make those dreams reality.
Most people aren’t scared but they like to mock those who pretend to have “ made “ something they have generated with simplistic text prompts . Never forget that the average imbecile can do the same thing so it has no value … the garbage you put on your channel do very very little views and that is a good thing , the bad news is that allowing you to fool yourself into believing that you can create things with no work and no talent has a carbon footprint . Your channel,isn’t needed , nobody watches it , it isn’t the future , it will never be …. The sooner you accept that reality the better
I listen to this whole thing in its entirety and some of it I took in as validation some of it I took in as rant. What I want to get to the bottom of is what do you think should be a solution for this? Because as a presently stands, I am not clear on your stance. If I go off of assumptions, you might call me a moron.
A clear solution would be for existing copyright law to clearly set provisions to prevent theft with generative AI and then large scale enforcement just as these governmental agencies enforce anti-piracy laws in every other arena
@@DJPain1 OK. So if they do that that cuts down on a rough estimate here, but about 75 to even 85% of its information. so how do you propose people going about using the information if that much of it is cut now?
Ai does not store information. It “remembers” the information just like you do. Remembering a book you said isn’t the same as owning it currently. You can “remember the hook of a song, and not have the sheet music or the album. It’s the same thing.
@@ghost-user559 yeah the hook is stored in my memory which is exactly the problem of AI who claims it doesn't store info in its memory. I didn't talk about owning anything. If the hook of a song I don't own is stored in my memory and I sing what's in my memory in a paid concert without permission of the owner of the song then it's a problem. AI does this, not all the time but it happens and when it happens it needs to be regulated
@@energytrail315 No one can scan your memory to find that hook. Same thing with ai. You can’t go into the data and “play the samples”, same as I can’t look through your brain or MRI and “play your thoughts”. All the ai stores is raw math, and its not in any way separate, its all one gigantic matrix of potential. A brain surgeon can’t find that hook in your brain matter on the table during surgery. Thinking isn’t infringing is it? Same thing. You can infringe copyright with a piano, your voice, or a sheet of paper and some staff lines, do we need to regulate pianos and sheets of paper just in case someone does something that they shouldn’t? No. It’s on the individual to do their due diligence just like it always has been for every single tool that exists.
its learning and will get smarter and soon it will be producing music. but to solely depend on is crazy.. don't know who said iy but here goes "there are two types of people , that get used by technology and those that use technology" seems like a lot of people are being used by technology .. use it lightly if at all
I use some AI stuff but it's only to do the monotonous. You don't even need to use AI to generate samples or music. I just write generative music using probability. Any knowledgeable producer knows synthesis or how to work a sample into something they can use. It not only takes longer than just using effects and probability but is dogwater quality and not cleared.
What are these music industry unions doing? Are they sleeping, they aren't fighting for us much. Congresswoman Talib has been fighting more for us than them.
I am not anti-A.I. I've used it for helping me generate images that I could never make. BUT LIKE YOU, I call out BS when I see it. A.I. isn't the problem, it's who controls A.I. It has taken me many years to come up with my own type sound, it sucks to think something could copy and paste in 10 minutes.
I’ve personally never said we were better than computers. The current concern is blatant theft though. Car makers fight for their jobs to stay in the US. This is outsourcing, but instead of to humans in exploited countries, it’s computers.
It's not about being "better" or not. The cost factor is the most important. Businesses don't care about the quality, they only care about what will make them the most profit, and cutting humans out of the equation for cheap AI will do just that. People don't seem to be as scared of AI as they should be. I guess it's time for all of us to find a nice comfy place on the street and just let the robots takeover.
@@DJPain1 those things can be successful, certainly gain attention and raise the flag. Kickstarter- gofundme ? A couple of those platforms can be pro artist.
@@DJPain1 you're right though. The ai algos are ripping off songs. There has been a few instances I have seen on tiktok. My opinion is it's a good tool, but the art of crate digging is still pure joy. I am 50/50 on it! Dope vid.
The cognitive dissonance is strong with music generators. They are theft machine. It’s hard to grasp why this is even remotely controversial. You guys are laying it out with receipts and facts and still getting pushback. It’s insane
@DJPain1 I'm sorry I think u misunderstood my vague comment. I'm not in saying that it's the only option to take it or leave it, I'm merely saying it's 100 % fact it's not going anywhere, I agree that it can be used as a tool and not to let it totally replace us. That's the part I am saying to embrace, but just like piracy it's always going to be an issue. I see this as an opportunity to capitalize some parts of it
@@dopessongs3635 they handled piracy via the law and its enforcement. Thats all we can ask for. Right now, we’re not getting it and producers themselves don’t seem to want it.
@DJPain1 well I can see you going into this direction of law, see opportunity in all of this. Might need to be one of the pioneers to help make it a law
Sir, I believe that AI can not outdo human creativity. I think the more the market gets saturated with AI music the more it will be easy to distinguish which was created by a human being. I think these tools will improve with time but the improvements cannot outdo human beings because it learns everything from humans first. It cannot break new ground. Artist who hone their craft and avoid AI will become more valuable because how distinct they are.
I hope that the RIAA, and any producers that find their work being stolen, are able to sue companies like Udio and Suno into the ground; it's blatant theft at this point. AI obviously isn't going anywhere but hopefully lawsuits result in these companies having to obtain consent and fairly compensate creatives to use their work in training their AIs.
Learning isn't theft, theft is theft. Producer tags is probably a content ID issue that made the AI like the tags, and you need to prompt for them. So the copyrights holders are the infringers in their legal case. No theft unless you publish an infringing work. The copyright holders created the infringement and then published that infringement. Producer tags are in many songs so they must be ignored by content ID software as to not flag their own songs.
@@DJPain1 it's ridiculous and it's way out of hand. I hate to say it but people won't care until it affects them personally and by then it will be too late.
@@DJPain1 wow I see you just like all the other folks on here call folks names because you can't think pass 2024 ,this stuff is moving fast if you think what you see now is the end all be all ,you don't need to make videos for the ppl ,you going broke just like the rest of them
People who love AI keep loving it because it's stealing from YOU too teach itself. Meaning developers have to steal your work to teach it. It's ok until it's you it stole from. So what happens when you have to start paying AI services to generate your beats, pay for the rights to keep it and you have to maintain there subscription to keep the beat YOU generated in circulation. You haven't even gotten to distribution. Oh you still have to pay beatstars, distrokid, marketing & you're going to go through all of that for AI and it's not your original work? And now the fine print is telling you it never will be your original work? Then on top of that visualize 50 people getting the same generated loop all 50 put it on TH-cam. 20 discover it and you all start reporting each other because you think it's your original work 😂Make AI generated music make sense. The people behind it don't care if you get sued or not, they won't back you up. What they will do is change there policy so they won't have to be bothered with you. 😂
Stealing your work to reproduce it is a violation of copyright infringement The law is the law . Napster got shut down for file sharing This is the same damn thing .
Dj Pain with all due respect to you, Ai will not produce a producers tag by mistake, that's bogus, you have to put it inside the prompt, I had 3 songs stolen from me by the big record companies but I'm a small guy, so I received absolutely nothing from my stolen material, well karma is B, now everyone will be able to create as long as you are creative and not trying to intentionally prompt Ai to do what is wrong and incorrect like to steal other peoples creations, it's humans who are the Problem
@@DJPain1 He proves it spits out the tags, but he doesn't show and prove it happened by quote on quote mistake. I'm not trying to get anything, it's just my comment.
Here’s the original video: th-cam.com/video/DBir0ugZZvo/w-d-xo.htmlsi=7S-rXDTL7HqrlQ5N
This was honestly very eye opening for me as I had NO CLUE generative music had gotten this "good" over the last year or so! In my head I thought it would take much longer and be a much harder task for generative AI to be able to output music that didn't sound like randomly generated nonsense, and seeing it stealing copywritten material 1 for 1 in so many of these examples is really shocking. It was something I was completely oblivious to so I didn't really "worry" about and I thank you and SMM for bringing this to the public. I have absolutely no clue what our options are as songwriters and producers honestly, these large corporations have shown that when there is money to be made they will put all morals to the side and happily screw over the people who are going to suffer from it the most.
Thank you again DJ Pain great video!
Thank you
Thanks for the shout out.
Thank you 🙏🏽
The problem is these things allow too many non-artistic people to enter into these spaces and they rely heavily on these "tools" because they had no artistic integrity to begin with.
Yeah like Daws, Synths, Autotune?
@@ghost-user559 no stupid. daws n synth softs made it affordable for musicians who wanna create that didnt have rich ass parents to give them 10k to buy 1 keyboard or 1 beat machine.
we still had to put in the 10,000 hours to learn these programs n we could still connect midi keyboards to play. world of a difference from having ai tools make the music for u.
@@unknwngamer1 You are telling me it didn’t create 50 million “type beat drill rap” fruity loops channels that spam a hundred million loops they stole off of splice too?
@@ghost-user559 no thats not what u said. u tried to say becuz of tools like daws is why music became more simpler n thats incorrect.
there will always be people in any industry that just join in n try to make a quick buck off a growing trend. its inescapable.
@unknwngamer1, You completely missed the point of his argument. DAWs, VST’s, Chord Tools, Guitar Riff Tools, and even synths increase the automation of music production. The irony is that after not being to follow the basic argument you levied a childish insult against someone’s intelligence.
The reason why these producers are defending AI is because it’s yet another short cut to create music. They can do less work and create more tracks. They are digging their own graves because the legal headaches are coming.
Digging their own graves and decorating the holes
Glad you found my video interesting! I def agree that we're all in this together and here's what I think we can all do right now to make a difference: just speak out. Make videos, posts, blogs, etc. talking about these issues and how artists and producers feel about it. If artists and producers tell their fans they're not cool with certain AI companies, that can help steer us in a more ethical direction.
@@SyncMyMusic thank you for making the video. Would love to collaborate on similar content.
Yeah, put any producer tag into Suno and it will spit it out. I cackled when it said DAMN SON WHERE'D YOU FIND THIS when I pasted some XXXtentacion lyrics in. It's a neat tool, but I'm starting to get a little worried.
Technically, if you read the Terms of Service, you are not supposed to do so or input anything you don't have the right to, including lyrics. I'm sure they will put some safeguards in as it progresses.
Not to mention, accounts will be suspended once they are identified.
@@dprice2800 So Udio and Suno Have to sue the Labels and others for breaking terms and service and input copyright material. I guess China and spotify will go straight to consumer with the new music industry😂
@@dprice2800 typing something like ‘another one’ doesn’t violate copyright law. Typing is ‘mellow trap’ doesn’t either. And yet the output of both, as seen in the original video, is full of blatantly copyrighted sound recordings
I have nothing of value to add really but mostly commenting for the algo - I am producing music only as a hobby for the love of it so I could safely carry on with the traditional way of doing things not having to worry about paying bills, but still, thinking about the direction everything is taking with sites like Suno or AI replacement in general is a big downer. Specially if it pushes producers who actually dared to try making a living out of it aside. I would hate to see that. Thanks for speaking up DJ Pain and everyone else who does.
Thank you
I had a feeling that Suno was a little suspicious on the side that we have to feed the AI with information, and it's obvious where it's coming from.
I'm glad that I don't just trust/use these things without looking into the TAC's and Privacy policies, etc because they'll tell you in their own words what they're doing.
Thanks for the vid Pain!
It's Fair Use for transformative use: AI doesn’t store or replicate the original songs it learns old patterns and structures then generates new ones. AI could never be a threat to real artists like me because AI has no creativity and never will. Since AI is reassembling and remixing patterns and styles learned from past works, AI is bound by the boundaries of what has already been created. AI will never be Innovative. This is just going to be a passing trend that will last a few years, but AI will make an excellent tool for real artists. Imagine making a beat from scratch and having AI analyze your patterns giving you different options you can use to generate bridges or switch ups with ease. Imagine instead of quantizing you let AI adjust the pattern slightly in different ways the possibilities are endless!!
@@PHPMuzik it clearly stores and replicates original recordings, that’s literally what this video proves
AI might cause frustration or even job loss, but that doesn’t make it illegal. Just like you can’t copyright a groove or style (Blurred Lines case wrongly implied otherwise), you can’t stop AI from learning patterns in copyrighted music-people have done this forever. The real issue, and the upcoming lawsuits, are about how companies are getting the music to train on, not AI generating new material. That said, AI using a producer's tag (an iconic brand element that can cause a likelihood of confusion or affect income) crosses a line and shouldn’t be legal. Guess what, we already have laws against that-same with using copyrighted melodies. You can’t copyright patterns or techniques, whether human or AI-driven. The backlash comes from people upset that AI is faster than what took them years to learn (or not understanding the tech). But we don’t make laws based on feelings. AI is a tool-adapt or get left behind.
@@TonyByte 😂😂😂
@@DJPain1 Well articulated, thank you. ;) The only clear copyright violation you’ve provided is AI reproducing a producer’s tag, which is definitely illegal. Beyond that, there’s no concrete proof or real understanding of how AI works, and no examples of AI-generated music violating copyright. Claims like AI being a “modern-day sampling machine” or extracting value from artists are emotional and speculative, without solid technical backing. Feel free to call me names, but you can’t say I don’t understand the tech or the threat it poses to musicians. My music will be the first to lose profit-it’s already happening. Two things can be true at once: 1. It sucks. 2. It's not illegal. This is like past tech fears, such as synths or the printing press. However, today’s tech is moving faster. There’s no stopping the AI train-not just in music. I’m not naive enough to think it’s all good, but neither you, me, nor your highly productive laugh emojis are going to stop it.
I've been playing around with Suno just making instrumental stuff to chop up, theme songs for my dog, goofy songs about poop. I've once had it randomly generated a weird voicemail massage at the end of one, but nothing that sounded recognizable like a tag verbatim. But even if you type a long ass prompted it will simplify it down, so for dude to say "all he typed in was mellow trap" is more likely than not a little inaccurate. But I do agree with the sentiment and find it to be quite odd it could get that close if not trying to. And, when it comes to the "custom mode" I can only assume a person could manipulate it to go way further in any direction they want than it would in the normal generator. All in all, does feel a little concerning, but how much of this being manipulated to feel more of a widespread phenomenon. Now I have no reason to doubt the guy, but I have trust issues haha, so when the guy says 7 out of the 10 tacks had the tag, all I can think about is it would be incredibly easy to delete ones in-between than didn't have a tag to further prove his point, so his video would hit harder. News outlets do it all the time, information is secondary to engagement, and it's not a conversation so even if there is inaccuracies and falsehoods, once the next topic/story/video drops we all move on. A.i. is a tool, when miss used shit can get a little screwy, like use a car for transportation, it's all good... use a car as a battering ram, not so much haha.
That’s creepy but it’s more proof that AI is storing input and spitting it out at potentially 100% as output
This is the real producer challenge. 😃
Yep and real producers are fighters who recognize that this is a serious legal and ethical problem. They don’t just smugly shrug; they respect music and musicians.
great Kdot reference
Yep, the funny part is that AI music producers are too afraid to expose themselves right now
fr no cap
@@DJPain1 yeah fr men no cap
All respect, great convo. I wont justify the use of it.
Interesting cause i was the "i wont use splice. Make all my samples" person (past 5yrs) Invested into instruments > Vsts
Ive gotten Mind Blowing / Genre bending crazy ai resilts. not being lazy, Evolving my style beyond the A.I.
But my obsession to improv my craft, is a different beast then the Music Business. The ethics you bring up is a Needed conversation, the Jukebox ai project also sourced copyrighted material.
@@MoGratitude I understand. Splice doesn’t infringe on another human’s rights though
I totally agree, you are 100% on point. The elephant in the room hiding behind the artist and content ripoff debate is the amount of server juice, electricity, and emissions these models are pumping. If AI is revolutionary and a good thing then why are more resources not being put towards solving environmental collapse? It's a beeds for land story.
Yep, it’s just more tech bro colonization
With the art AI, the reason they sometimes are able to reproduce something is because they have a lot of examples in the training data of the same thing. Eg. there will have been a ton of images of The Mona Lisa, so it sees that as a set pattern, in the same way it knows what a dog or a cat is meant to look like.
This is probably why producer tags are able to be replicated in the music AIs - the tag appears many times in the training data as it's on every beat that producer does, so the AI sees it as a common pattern, in the same way it knows what "house beat", "sad chord progression" is, etc. It just doesn't know tags are specific copyrighted elements, rather than more general commonly-used elements like types of rhythms/sounds.
This is all just summary of the most basic points in my video
@@DJPain1 Sorry, I didn't make my point clear - my explanation was for why the music AI can generate the tags even though it does not contain any actual audio data. It is the same with the art AI. This is where the lawsuits so far have run into difficulties - the models don't contain any actual copies of the copyrighted material.
In the art case, the AI companies have said they definitely used copyrighted material, but they bring up the "Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc." case as precedent for fair use covering this.
I'm not saying this is good or bad btw, my overall point here is that the art case and the ChatGPT case provide a lot of info into how these AI lawsuits are playing out.
This all is so much on point and adds up. It's a problem. The same way music creators complain about Spotify is the same way it will be with these AI companies. The record companies will find a way to get paid somewhere down the line. We really need to stick together on this and find a way to protect ourselves. If not the services of the creators will no longer be relevant. Hell, we already have the monster looking at us eye to eye. Time to choose sides. 👀
Producers are so goddamn dense though they don’t get it
I am a big fan of the channel. Keep up the good work. However; I slightly disagree with you on this one. Let me explain. It's either we're going to accept the use of AI to replace ANY musician, producer, singer, rapper, songwriter, and beat maker or we're not. BUT WE CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! Meaning, I cannot say it is OK to use AI for vocals (Because I can't sing or rap), but it is NOT OK to use AI to make beats or musical productions, BECAUSE I MAKE BEATS AND IM A PRODUCER! That is called HYPOCRISY!
Good point
Exactly! Just like producers are shortcutting on vocals so they don’t have to hire a vocalist. Vocalists are shortcutting on producers so they don’t have to buy beats. I understand his point where suno went wrong is not knowing about the producer tags. They probably don’t have someone who understands IP rights and licensing in their data training team.
Using “AI” (DSP) for roughing vocals for a song you personally wrote (you wrote the melody) because you can’t sing is no different than using a guitar VST and a keyboard controller because you can’t play guitar. At issue here is entire complete tracks (sans lyrics) being algorithmically generated.
I never used AI because I couldn’t sing.
But yes, any generative AI is problematic. Capitalism makes us hypocrites.
@@ckatheman Before the synthesizer, you needed a full band in the studio to play drums, bass, guitar, piano, percussion, etc. Plus if you wanted a brass section, you needed to bring in at least 1 trumpet player, a saxophonist, and a trombone player. Don't let me even start talking about 1st & 2nd violins, violas, cellos, and double bases for string sections. The bottom line and the truth is for decades now, all these instruments can be played by ONE MAN, IN A BEDROOM STUDIO, USING SAMPLES, ON A KEYBOARD! Why don't we talk about the tens of thousands of session musicians from around the world that were put out of work because of this??? The moral of the story is that IT IS POINTLESS TO FIGHT AGAINST TECHNOLOGY.
Your videos make the most sense, especially this one! 💯
I appreciate that!
Keep speaking the truth, PAIN!!! FIGHT THE POWER in my Chuck D Voice!!!! Damn that HURT
💪🏼
DJ Pain..
Of everything i love about you and your music..
The most i love about you is your love of the torture of our Lorne!!!
Your amazing!!!
❤❤
Lorne would put my voice in a wheelchair though. He weighs 200 fahkin poundsh
*You're
I've got people arguing with me because humans had to input the words. It's about the notes and rhythm being used with the words. If I take the words in these tags and input them into a text to voice app the output will sound nothing like the tag despite using the exact same words. The fact that this is happening with the tags shows that the same thing is happening with the music.
These people are fucking morons that should be on their own stupid island of low iq self-destruction
Thanks! For all info u share
@@modsbeats thank you so much, appreciate your consistent support
@@DJPain1 no prob
I think a lot of us who lived through the 2010s music producer boom, and have been a part of it have seen this before with splice. but its why we're worried about it. Its not about the fact that we can choose, its the fact that a customer can choose. It used to take some kind of know how to at least put splice loops together, now it takes a text prompt to get a whole song. why as a company, with a budget, would you pay someone for music, when you can just generate it? Thats the fear, its not about authenticity or aging out of relevance, its the fact that we're allowing ourselves to be replaced
@@Cody404_ splice isn’t piracy, there’s a fundamental legal and practical difference now
@@DJPain1 The piracy is a different point from what I was making, i was more stating that the fact that they're using real material to train these ai, feels similar to when splice was introduced. Progress is not a bad thing, and it's not to call splice samples lazy (i use them all the time) it just feels like one more 'convenience' that lowers the entry point of music, down to a text prompt. that's what scares me.
Won't ever be sufficient outlet for millions of tracks AI will be creating. Its biggest market and selling point to non musical users will be intentionally creating vocals and tracks that sound like known artists.
I disagree. Look at BBL Drizzy
Exactly… you can’t just take people’s music that they worked so hard on and make it available for people to use without any kind of permission! 😤
I’ve been following Jesse since 2017 and he’s been doing a great job investigating this matter! 💪
Honestly if a producer needs to use any sort of AI during production as a “tool” they’re just not as good a producer. I truly don’t understand the desire to integrate this into music. We make music to connect with each other on a different level. What connection is being made when the audio was auto generated instead of by a human soul? I believe with all my being there is not an AI platform in my lifetime that can compete with me or other producers who truly care for their craft like you pain.
Simple
People want music
This AI stuff makes music at a high enough level that it passes
Producers wanna make money or need to pay the bills. And we view music as a product to be consumed
Rather than artistic expression
Then there’s also a question about technology and its impact on music. Like beat making before computers was a tideois process but it sure added a certain texture to the final product. By accident most likely. Does non computer music feel like more or really music ?
@@quesostuff1009 that’s the thing. I don’t view music as a product to be consumed. All I care about is the expression. The ai doesn’t make anything that passes yet, not even close.
I would have never been able to transform "Black Betty" into "Bitch I'm Petty" without it 🤷♂️
I stopped using it after hearing about this a bit ago. It also made a track that sounded like an artist that no longer makes music and I thought it was odd as that was a unique EDM style. This type of thing is going to happen due to the amount of training data required to make such a model so these companies are definitely stealing and infringing on copyright to make the "AI". They don't store information while creating the "AI" but they are trained off of stolen music so output they produce is likely to be similar, also the web application does store data and probably recycles it for refining the model so to speak but that has been shown to produce worse results when done incorrectly. I think you have a great grasp of the underlying technology. Whoever said that you did not understand should also understand the inventors of the models these "AI" are based on barely grasp the full picture of the technology as it's created by teams usually not individuals. As for a solution I do think these places like suno and udio need to be held accountable for the blatant copyright theft, I am unsure the major labels have our best interest in mind though. Thank you for the great content keep it up.
SMH, not sure if I can say this yet, but I'm afraid we're dealing with something even more dangerous than Napster, Torrent, Limewire, etc.
@@C12omega absolutely. Piracy was black and white; this is piracy but with no accountability, hundreds millions of dollars of funding and complicity from its victims
@DJPain1 Respect to you, sir, for featuring video with Jesse Josefson aka Sync My Music. He's a really good guy & he's built up a great community in terms of how to get into & thrive in the Sync Licensing space, especially in the era of AI. May YOU continue to have success in ALL of your own endeavors, ALWAYS. Peace & blessings. 🙏🏽
@@SimonePhoenix I can tell he’s a thoughtful and informed musician
There's vst outs that actually make some really good melodies , so it probably won't be long until full ai beats start sounding great too. Trap beats are so robotic and perfectly quantized anyways so ai could make those already no problem. It's not like a human can play triplet hi hats live anyways. But if we're talking timbo level drum patterns I don't see ai being able to replicate producers with unique rhythms
Not the point of my video. Please for your own sake, watch first and comment later
Would this video be a thing if the AI did not add the tags ?
It feels like the video wants a make a larger point of the AI integration in beat making but keeps pointing back to the tag usage (which def can be programmed out of these AI models )
@@quesostuff1009 how are you missing the obvious point that these platforms are built on theft, that their developers have been lying and that the implications of this are incredibly grave?
thanks for the share , maybe we can fight Ai with Ai and have a team of lawyers on standby that represent all like a revamp BMI or something
Ai music was entertaining several weeks ago, now it’s become a major problem. Some super slick entertainment attorney needs to take this to Washington : DC , and present this to committee. I have zero faith in Government, but something needs to get on paper about this. You, DJ Pain, would hold up well in front of those committee individuals. A civil suit, for the world wide individuals, creative artists, musicians is in violation of this theft of copyright and intellectual property. I myself, or anyone, are in chains afraid to publicly release any new music, in fear that “they” will steal and recycle it as theirs. Humans are given gifts of creativity. This is an attack on mankind as human individuals.
🎯
So would it even make sense to even register a copyright for tags, beats songs etc moving forward to protect your work?
@@qtippz if you’re suing the ai companies, sure. Otherwise, read up on how copyright protection works on copyright.gov’s faq
If you algorithmically break down stuff and then procedurally regenerate it 1:1, it's still a sample. Still a copy.
Exactly, fuck all that nerd talk
So Michael Winslow is guilty of sampling?
th-cam.com/video/swT69QkcZ8I/w-d-xo.html
It's called a forgery when it is an identical work, but not a direct copy. The tag needed to be prompted for, so who created it? A forgery requires that it be passed off as the original. Who is saying it is the producer tag?
The user is liable.
Also the training step to prevent forgeries has a hole.
Thanks Pain 1.
I've been using AI for my beats for a few months now but let me be very specific: what I mean by using is have AI spit out some random chord progression (which took me a long time to get right using prompts) and then interpolating the whole thing and chopping it up...I basically use it when I'm super uninspired but I always re-record what I'm getting using my own instruments cause yeah, it just sounds trash...honestly, I'm a lot faster creating loops from scratch because prompting takes a long time
Yeah I think when they listen to various songs, they will think the watermarks are part of the music .. I had some funny experience with trance watermarks being vaguely present when I used saturation on it etc.. it didn't seem intentional again I don't think there is any flagrant violations going on, just incidental when certain songs over saturate the sources or have too high a weighting on specific words. IMO they should just content ID all the output and be done with it. There is nothing wrong with the technology it is just that they can't really judge accidental output that is similar. Again I think the intent is totally transformative use not derivative use.
A specific aspect of ai production that I see very little comment about is = how good the production is. Compression, Limiting, EQ, Leveling etc. those things are very time consuming and require expensive hardware or software.
Yep
AI is probably even a lot better than they have released to the public. I'm still waiting for Google music sandbox to be released. When you make a demo beat or upload a sample to the input feature the AI can make some pretty wild sounding music. This is not going away.
Sure, but let’s elevate the convo
@@DJPain1 that's what the Train Station said when they started building Airports.
@@Sneakycat1971 the train station said ‘let’s elevate the conversation?’
@@DJPain1 haven't you seen Thomas and Friends?
With Udio and Suno you can upload somebody's else's beat that has a tag in it and if you write the words to that tag in the lyric box it can very well say it with the same vocal. I've done remixes of songs by uploading a snippet of the original song and pasting the lyrics from the song.
Which shows that these platforms are just taking material and spitting it back out, NOT transforming it. Thereby eliminating their "fair use doctrine" defense.
@@DJPain1 When you upload something to the sites you have to answer a question that you own the rights. The AI thinks you own the right so they just try to improve what you've uploaded. It's over for the old days of producing music. It's pretty much over for humans recording music. The only thing humans will do is play live and cover AI songs.
@@DJPain1 I made this instrumental just by uploading a snippet of a sample from an obscure song. It's only going to get better. th-cam.com/video/sxTfi0gMCB4/w-d-xo.htmlfeature=shared
@@DJPain1They already have the full legal precedent for training not violating copyright whatsoever and its well entrenched and established. Training an ai has zero to do with the output from a legal standpoint. There is no “fair use doctrine defense” in the real world. The reality is that a dataset can be copyrighted, and the output is on the user. You can break every copyright that exists using a piano or a DAW right? Do we ban pianos and DAWs or do we hold the end user accountable? The law doesn’t blame the instruments, it blames the person willingly not doing their due diligence.
Thank you for this channel.... I'm a musician and I rather play my own music than to sample other music.
Ai is not sampling,
It’s sharing a data file for the ability for Ai to replicate. Totally illegal under copyright laws Period , what’s next copying people in a movie scene or a video game No this needs to stop now.
I bet the film industry fights harder than these bitch ass producers
It’s not illegal whatsoever. It’s morally wrong. It isn’t illegal. If people just keep repeating what they wish was true than nothing is going to change. There is already precedent for zero ability to stop training with copyrighted works. It’s not considered infringement. What is infringing is the end user putting out a track that has legitimately copyrighted elements. The training is all just optics and them trying to sound friendly, because they already know it’s 100% allowed for them to train on anything they want.
How is this possible?
First, AI does not STORE music.
AI converts music into data, analyzes and stores patterns in the data, then strings patterns together to make music.
YES AI is trained on copyrighted music.
YES you can FORCE an AI to reproduce a vocal tag by typing in that tag (that's what the producer did).
But arguments about "what humans do" aside, that's the basic process.
That's how this is possible.
Definitely feel some kinda way about AI and these companies that have decided to use the Arts as their testing ground. One way to pushback towards this disruption, is if there was a Union that could unilaterally speak for all of us, Big and small, on music related matters like the Movie industry has.
Or at least spreading awareness as you are doing and a number of others on youtube is the best next thing.
What is actually needed is something that I dunno if it exists, and that is a code or a program that can SOURCE BACK to the AI training sources itself. I know that tech exists to detect when a sample or beat was taken from it's original user into a newer work.
Ideally, that would be one way to combat what's going on with AI prompt-generated companies like Udio & Suno, is to create a software/program that could scour their database of music to determine how EXACTLY they trained their AI to learn how to produce the song.
It's funny, because I remember when I had to write a college paper; you're expected to cite your references at the end of the paper.
However, these companies are producing and SELLING works without ANY citation DESPITE it's clear that they have not created them on their own. AND, worse yet, they are taking CREDIT from others without showing the prerequisite citation; otherwise known as plagiarism.
With this new technology, we're experiencing the musical form of plagiarism.
However, it seems that way too many are okay with this?!
I'm not. This is not cool at all.
And before I end my rant (this obviously hit a nerve here) I think that the fact producer tags are getting discovered within their database indicates that part of their "training of AI" included taking music ALL OVER the internet without their permission.
Which dovetails to what Mustafa Suleyman, Microsoft's AI boss, declared that anything & everything on the web is "freeware".
Unbelievable
@@SincerelyYoursWill the union is the RIAA but they represent the labels, not us
0:11 not even 1 Minute in and bro already roasted me ☠️☠️
Same bro 💀looked me right in the eye while doing it too
Plot twist: I support you and I dislike anybody saying that to you
@@DJPain1 it's all good I just thought it was funny 🤣
gotta dig into how its built, one big logical error here and completely missing an entire different side to AI music that few think about
The output proves the input is theft. I don’t care about anything else.
@@DJPain1 that's a damn shame, there's some amazing stuff that's made without using libraries of others music. Willful ignorance just makes you sound ill informed on the topic. ✌️
@@lon9core I show proof that this company is stealing from our community and I’m the ignorant one, got it.
@@DJPain1 if that's what you took from that 🤷🏻😂
@@lon9core not sure if you realize this, but this is my video, so I’m aware of what this video’s stance is. Enjoy the weekend.
Might be trash now, but technology advances everyday. AI putting everybody out of business. I wish I can hop in a time machine and go back to the good ole days.
AI is garbage. It can't create unless it has something to copy from. Then it puts it together in the most shittiest of ways. Even with advancements it will just regurgitate what was already made.
You didn’t even watch the video and you left a comment
@@DJPain1 How do you know that?? That shows up?? Lol
@@vmi4172 because the video has nothing to do with how good AI beats sound and I’m used to people talking far more than they listen to
@@DJPain1that’s because you use cringe click bait thumbnails
im not worried about ai. making music is about inventing or innovating. regarding copyrights, i'll let the courts handle that. nobody should be using ai output as the final output anyway since its unoriginal.
Because you don’t do this for a living. Most Americans aren’t worried about child labor laws in Vietnam.
I think that’s why suno got sued for copy right
One of many
Jesus. I already hated AI... Here's the thing. AI can help in a lot of different ways- setting "presets" based on your mix and not just randomly is one that comes to mind. The only thing I think we can do is what I've been doing- keep on working, and when possible speak out against AI (and specifically generative ai). I've been trying to think of ways to protect from my music being used to feed AI. I'm not against AI at all, but generative ai is what I'm against. People supporting this tech are supporting the death of creativity. Period. It happened with AI visual art- but now we're seeing the fully ai generated stuff kind of fall a little and we're starting to see more artists incorporating AI elements into their art. Now I know that the labels are going to be doing different shit with AI, but I think for the producers and artists and all of the unrepresented people in the industry, we'll end up doing what the visual art community is doing now- using AI as PART of our workflow. IDK if I'm delusional or if my optimism will help, but it's literally the only thing that's keeping me working and not forcing me in bed 24/7 depressed as hell.
@@tyoismusic don’t read the comments if you don’t want to get anymore depressed about it then
At 3:29 you can see the text for the producer tag was enterd by the user. Suno didn't "spit it out", the user put it in.
Suno spat out a sampled, copyrighted tag. I wish I could be this blissfully unaware.
@@DJPain1Only because the user entered text. The output is a direct result of user's input. And it's not "sampled", it's generated.
@@BerkmanHouse I refuse to believe you’re missing the obvious to this degree
@@DJPain1 You also seem to to refuse to respond to or refute what I've said. Are you not able to?
@@BerkmanHouse this is a big waste of my time. here's an example: the statement "I'm loving it" is just words. If I input those words into an AI, and the exact Macdonalds jingle comes out, that proves they are inputting and outputting copyrighted material, thus violating federal law. If I input the words, "Cash money AP" and the output is the exact copyrighted master recording in the same voice, cadence and with the same delay effect on it, not even a toddler on a sugar crash would miss the obvious blatant theft.
Additionally, the input didn't include "cash money ap" as the lyrics. The output did. You missed that as well. This was a total waste of my time.
Hear me out bro! Music = MATH and AI = Infinitely better and FASTER at MATH than any human being on Earth!
So is it that impossible for you to believe that even though there's some issues with it *RIGHT NOW* it's only a matter
of time before AI will easily kick out instrumentals that are just as good *IF NOT BETTER* than the top producers of today!
Hard to understand your position. Fight it? Use It? Condemn it? It sounds somewhat contradictory.
I study AI. Some of it is rather good. It should be because it learns for a solid database of a large percentage of what people have already done. I don't think it's good for creativity. Sure, it's here but should it be if it's just scavenges other's work.
I do agree that the lawsuit likely won't benefit artists, composers, musicians, and producers that much.
Rest your brain for a bit
Yeah❗️ Facts. AI can’t compete. 0:11
No
These producers been making ai beats for years and the cats out the bag
Wym?
@@DJPain1 they defending it because they been using ai to make beats and sell them.
I don't like the results I've gotten from Suno. But Udio is incredible. I like using Udio. I don't use it as a crutch, and I can definitely see AI beats as possibly being a "Trojan Horse" of sorts. I personally don't have a problem with Udio....Suno is a different story. But I also don't have a problem with producers that don't choose to use ai in their productions. However, in all actuality, most people that make beats are doing it for fun, whether realized or not. Suno knows that. A huge number of those tracks will never see the light of day.
Btw, I didn't address the theft aspect as it goes without saying that it's wrong.
I watched some of his vids on sync placements. U should interview him on MEC( sorry i still refer it as MEC podcast ).
Don’t worry, it’ll revert back to MEC soon enough
well dam fr no cap
AI will only get better in depth and quality. Don't underestimate its potential to completely disrupt... amongst others, the music industry. 2) AI scraping the internet to learn is no different than a human guitarist listening and learning from Hendrix... so long as UDIO or SUNO output unique material that Shazam doesnt recognize... Like it or not, its not a copyright violation.
So the choice is simple to me: 1) adapt or 2) be anti-AI and brag about being a purist... But most listeners dont care how the sausage is made... Just sayin..
Man vs Machine
@@7evenZark7 man fighting for the right to suck machine 🍆 is more like it
🤭
If they put it on there, then, it’s illegal for a service provider to speak for a third party service provider, such as a water mark removal engineer, even if it’s their tag, they must have forfeited their AI generated prompt, or, people will quickly realize what Dolby Atmos is for. Otherwise, people have just been picking royalty free loops to cheaply stitch together and fraudulently register. Regardless, it puts people in check, to have to answer to these things. Lol
i cant even use loops or mels from others. it makes me feel disgusting 🤣. now ppl use AI with confidence? i’ll die the last organic human if need be.
My entire channel is music I've been making with AI. This is just the world we live in now. The people scared are those who are too prideful to adapt and see change as scary (as a lot of humans generally do, especially big change that happens fast). I'm SOOO thankful I'm not so simple minded that big change scares me.... in fact it has the opposite effect, getting me excited for new possibilities.
If something is too good to be true… it probably is 😂 I cannot predict the future, but the idea that anyone can generate AI songs with the click of a button, make them popular, and EARN A LIVING from them seem like bs. There will be lawsuits, and over saturation.
@@seaofroses8888 I wonder if we will ever get to that "click of a button" music. I know anti-AI people want to pretend that day is now....but it just isn't yet (unless you are doing pure instrumental low-fi stuff haha).
Making good songs from gen AI right now takes me like 8 hours per song (and I have to write the lyrics, since AI lyrics are still nonsense). Still a lot faster for the type of music it is than traditional music.
But actually earning a living? That is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT world. That is the slow long grind of marketing and building an audience for consistent work. No one is making a random handful of songs from AI and making a living at it lol. The world isn't so simple.
@@Shyeep I’m being realistic, the one click may not be now, but it’s only gonna get faster. As far as producing a song yourself, good experienced producers can definitely make a song in was less than 8 hrs.
I am wondering what you are trying to do. If you yourself don’t see financially profit as a prospect, and you are also not an artist(aside from the witting) what is the point? 😂
@@seaofroses8888 Oh, that is easy. I am an artist, and I do have hopes of financial profit in the future :)
I'm actually already a successful artist in another medium. So coming to music is just a continuation of the creative fire that is me haha.
But the thing about building a career in anything is more than just the product you create. It's about the slog of marketing and building an audience.....
Sadly there are a lot of people out there with dreams that would rather hang around BSing on reddit and twitter than actually putting in the work doing anything to make those dreams reality.
Most people aren’t scared but they like to mock those who pretend to have “ made “ something they have generated with simplistic text prompts . Never forget that the average imbecile can do the same thing so it has no value … the garbage you put on your channel do very very little views and that is a good thing , the bad news is that allowing you to fool yourself into believing that you can create things with no work and no talent has a carbon footprint . Your channel,isn’t needed , nobody watches it , it isn’t the future , it will never be …. The sooner you accept that reality the better
Right now, there is a legal battle that will decide the future of AI generated music.
@@climjames but not necessarily a future that favors musicians because we’re not the ones fighting the lawsuit
@@DJPain1 It is more about the big 3 wanting to control AI music and the generated content.
All facts.
I was shown suno by my son and I created a diddy song from it. There wasn't a tag on it though.
Weird
oh my god, Drake is literally an irl A.I
Great insight
DJ PAIN WITH THE UPPERCUT:)) TELL IT LIKE IT (TIS)
Always thank you 🙏🏽
I listen to this whole thing in its entirety and some of it I took in as validation some of it I took in as rant. What I want to get to the bottom of is what do you think should be a solution for this? Because as a presently stands, I am not clear on your stance. If I go off of assumptions, you might call me a moron.
A clear solution would be for existing copyright law to clearly set provisions to prevent theft with generative AI and then large scale enforcement just as these governmental agencies enforce anti-piracy laws in every other arena
@@DJPain1 OK. So if they do that that cuts down on a rough estimate here, but about 75 to even 85% of its information. so how do you propose people going about using the information if that much of it is cut now?
@@ShawnMonnstahMays I don’t understand this reply
some dude told you AI don't store any information? So what do they use for training then? lol
I don’t even care at this point, they’re caught red handed
Ai does not store information. It “remembers” the information just like you do. Remembering a book you said isn’t the same as owning it currently. You can “remember the hook of a song, and not have the sheet music or the album. It’s the same thing.
@@ghost-user559 yeah the hook is stored in my memory which is exactly the problem of AI who claims it doesn't store info in its memory. I didn't talk about owning anything. If the hook of a song I don't own is stored in my memory and I sing what's in my memory in a paid concert without permission of the owner of the song then it's a problem. AI does this, not all the time but it happens and when it happens it needs to be regulated
@@ghost-user559 and you're probably an AI yourself if you still condone that
@@energytrail315 No one can scan your memory to find that hook. Same thing with ai. You can’t go into the data and “play the samples”, same as I can’t look through your brain or MRI and “play your thoughts”. All the ai stores is raw math, and its not in any way separate, its all one gigantic matrix of potential. A brain surgeon can’t find that hook in your brain matter on the table during surgery. Thinking isn’t infringing is it? Same thing. You can infringe copyright with a piano, your voice, or a sheet of paper and some staff lines, do we need to regulate pianos and sheets of paper just in case someone does something that they shouldn’t? No. It’s on the individual to do their due diligence just like it always has been for every single tool that exists.
its learning and will get smarter and soon it will be producing music. but to solely depend on is crazy.. don't know who said iy but here goes "there are two types of people , that get used by technology and those that use technology" seems like a lot of people are being used by technology .. use it lightly if at all
I use some AI stuff but it's only to do the monotonous. You don't even need to use AI to generate samples or music. I just write generative music using probability. Any knowledgeable producer knows synthesis or how to work a sample into something they can use. It not only takes longer than just using effects and probability but is dogwater quality and not cleared.
What are these music industry unions doing? Are they sleeping, they aren't fighting for us much. Congresswoman Talib has been fighting more for us than them.
Yeah :/
I am not anti-A.I. I've used it for helping me generate images that I could never make.
BUT LIKE YOU, I call out BS when I see it. A.I. isn't the problem, it's who controls A.I.
It has taken me many years to come up with my own type sound,
it sucks to think something could copy and paste in 10 minutes.
Tbh, you are a hypocrite. Images are generative AI too. You are bypassing artists and photographers
I wasn't talking to you, so need to troll me. SFB.
@@manatee_flips6811 You got triggered cause you know I’m right 😂 You made a PUBLIC comment btw
@@seaofroses8888 dude, find something better to do with your time, leave me alone.
@@seaofroses8888 OK, you tell yourself that...I was offended.....by you and what you bring to the conversation. nothing.
😮 my AI beat said, "Yo it's Drizzy Drake and this is DJ Pain 1" 🤣😂
@@1bornbishop if it did, please share that with me
Naaa, I don't mess with the AI stuff. I just feel I want real music, that won't be repeated over and over. @@DJPain1
They just need to hire bunch of producers who work for them 😅
Why when we’re already working for them for free?
Prompts.... Its your prompt that sucks
@@quickstrike209 moron number 873
LoL! Good job Pain exposing these botd 😂
If we producers are “better than computers” , why are we concerned about computers??
I’ve personally never said we were better than computers. The current concern is blatant theft though. Car makers fight for their jobs to stay in the US. This is outsourcing, but instead of to humans in exploited countries, it’s computers.
It's not about being "better" or not. The cost factor is the most important. Businesses don't care about the quality, they only care about what will make them the most profit, and cutting humans out of the equation for cheap AI will do just that. People don't seem to be as scared of AI as they should be. I guess it's time for all of us to find a nice comfy place on the street and just let the robots takeover.
There is lack perspective for sure
We are at a similar period in time with the rational that using ai is not stealing, happened originally with Napster.
@@mwdrum I show proof that ai is stealing and the comments are still, ‘thAT nOt SteEllin tho l lOvE AI I WonT 2 maKe lUv tO it.’ We’re doomed.
@@DJPain1 I would donate to a go fund me / etc. to get this on track to hire legal help. A world wide / us suit is required.
@@mwdruma class action because it’s stealing from ALL of us
@@DJPain1 those things can be successful, certainly gain attention and raise the flag. Kickstarter- gofundme ? A couple of those platforms can be pro artist.
@@bristyla weird how sample clearance involves permission and payment and yet AI learning models don’t. But great point man, you did a great job.
🗣️💎💨
Alright dawg, I used suno to create an ai sample that was hard. I still chopped it up and it sounded dope
Ok?
@@DJPain1 you're right though. The ai algos are ripping off songs. There has been a few instances I have seen on tiktok. My opinion is it's a good tool, but the art of crate digging is still pure joy. I am 50/50 on it! Dope vid.
Señor Pain ( excuse my broken english) maybe you're right or maybe you're not, only time will tell. Saludos!
ok
“…producers… love it… they don’t have to pay anybody”? 🤔
@@the_yungchubbz this shouldn’t be confusing
The cognitive dissonance is strong with music generators. They are theft machine. It’s hard to grasp why this is even remotely controversial.
You guys are laying it out with receipts and facts and still getting pushback.
It’s insane
That’s why I’m just calling these producers bitch ass morons
@@DJPain1 I fucking love it
The end game is probably have AI create music so they don’t have to pay anyone
Author: Ray Kurzweil
Seriously
You can embrace it or get behind like the horse and buggy.
False dichotomy, but seeing the world in binary is the easy route so I don’t blame you
@DJPain1 I'm sorry I think u misunderstood my vague comment. I'm not in saying that it's the only option to take it or leave it, I'm merely saying it's 100 % fact it's not going anywhere, I agree that it can be used as a tool and not to let it totally replace us. That's the part I am saying to embrace, but just like piracy it's always going to be an issue. I see this as an opportunity to capitalize some parts of it
@@dopessongs3635 they handled piracy via the law and its enforcement. Thats all we can ask for. Right now, we’re not getting it and producers themselves don’t seem to want it.
@DJPain1 well I can see you going into this direction of law, see opportunity in all of this. Might need to be one of the pioneers to help make it a law
Sir, I believe that AI can not outdo human creativity. I think the more the market gets saturated with AI music the more it will be easy to distinguish which was created by a human being. I think these tools will improve with time but the improvements cannot outdo human beings because it learns everything from humans first. It cannot break new ground. Artist who hone their craft and avoid AI will become more valuable because how distinct they are.
@@mater5930 ok
I hope that the RIAA, and any producers that find their work being stolen, are able to sue companies like Udio and Suno into the ground; it's blatant theft at this point.
AI obviously isn't going anywhere but hopefully lawsuits result in these companies having to obtain consent and fairly compensate creatives to use their work in training their AIs.
Riaa is suing. The producers need to sue as class.
Learning isn't theft, theft is theft.
Producer tags is probably a content ID issue that made the AI like the tags, and you need to prompt for them. So the copyrights holders are the infringers in their legal case. No theft unless you publish an infringing work. The copyright holders created the infringement and then published that infringement.
Producer tags are in many songs so they must be ignored by content ID software as to not flag their own songs.
@@abram730 I can’t even imagine being this fucking stupid
@@DJPain1 I'm one of those stupid geniuses. You are one of those smart kids on the little bus with the helmet.
@@abram730 That's certainly what an authentically smart person would say.
I have created a song on Udio and it literally sounded like Nicki Minaj 😂😂😂😂 I can send it to you if you want Pain for review.
I believe you, trust me, I’ve experienced all of this first hand
@@DJPain1 it's ridiculous and it's way out of hand. I hate to say it but people won't care until it affects them personally and by then it will be too late.
We all sound like Elon Musk now.
Nah ive never been a fascist
Think 3-5 from now this ain't it ,it's only going to get bigger and better,so this video won't age well
That’s because you have no idea what this video is about. Your IQ is your business.
@@DJPain1 wow I see you just like all the other folks on here call folks names because you can't think pass 2024 ,this stuff is moving fast if you think what you see now is the end all be all ,you don't need to make videos for the ppl ,you going broke just like the rest of them
I think ai beats are trash too
People who love AI keep loving it because it's stealing from YOU too teach itself. Meaning developers have to steal your work to teach it. It's ok until it's you it stole from. So what happens when you have to start paying AI services to generate your beats, pay for the rights to keep it and you have to maintain there subscription to keep the beat YOU generated in circulation. You haven't even gotten to distribution. Oh you still have to pay beatstars, distrokid, marketing & you're going to go through all of that for AI and it's not your original work? And now the fine print is telling you it never will be your original work? Then on top of that visualize 50 people getting the same generated loop all 50 put it on TH-cam. 20 discover it and you all start reporting each other because you think it's your original work 😂Make AI generated music make sense. The people behind it don't care if you get sued or not, they won't back you up. What they will do is change there policy so they won't have to be bothered with you. 😂
Stealing your work to reproduce it is a violation of copyright infringement The law is the law . Napster got shut down for file sharing This is the same damn thing .
🎯
Dj Pain with all due respect to you, Ai will not produce a producers tag by mistake, that's bogus, you have to put it inside the prompt, I had 3 songs stolen from me by the big record companies but I'm a small guy, so I received absolutely nothing from my stolen material, well karma is B, now everyone will be able to create as long as you are creative and not trying to intentionally prompt Ai to do what is wrong and incorrect like to steal other peoples creations, it's humans who are the Problem
cool man, the video proves you wrong, but you got this.
@@DJPain1 He proves it spits out the tags, but he doesn't show and prove it happened by quote on quote mistake. I'm not trying to get anything, it's just my comment.
@@AvidAi55 jesus christ