Have you release music made with AI? 🟡 Become your Own Record Label: www.topmusicattorney.com/becomeyourownrecordlabel 🟢 Free Split Sheet Template: www.topmusicattorney.com/splitsheet 📄 Music Contracts Templates: www.topmusicattorney.com/music-contracts 📺 Get Your Music Into Tv/Film/Games: www.topmusicattorney.com/sync 💻 #1 Resource For Artists And Producers: www.topmusicattorney.com ⚖ Hire An Attorney: www.delgadoentertainmentlaw.com 📰 Get My Newsletter: www.topmusicattorney.com/newsletter/ 🎧 Listen To The TMA Podcast On All Streaming: www.topmusicattorney.com/podcast
YOU LITTERALLY HAVE TO COPY THE PERSONS MUSIC. THEN WRITE THEIR LYRICS INTO AN AI PROGRAM... ITS JUST LIKE COPYING A LYRIC FROM YOUR SONG THEN PUTTING IT INTO YOUR DAW AND SAYING THE SKY IS FALLING. FOR EXSAMPLE... YOU SAY YOU ARE A CREATOR... BUT YOU COPY EVERYONES MIDIS AND WORDS AND IDEAS FROM THE RADIO. IF YOU ARE A LAWYER YOU COPY WHAT YOUR TEACHERS TOLD YOU TO SAY... BUT YOU ARE SO GREEDY THAT YOU PRETEND THAT YOUR HELPING AND TRYING TO CARE ABOUT BUT... AUTOMATION with every song saying neon is kinda dumb. humans are so dumb and boring if they only use one rock to pound on the same thing. COVER SONGS ARE COPYING... AND LITTERALLY PLAGERISM LIKE YOU DO.
You should have someone from Suno come on as well. These terms need to be defined and updated as they don't reflect how people are engaging, sampling, recreating and desiring distribution of works with AI - Thanks for all your hard work! Maybe a video about the differences of using Suno vs Udio would be worth having as I wonder myself how similar these terms are. What are the defining factors or using one over the other.
@@djbigdad 20 years ago i used to sit and take all the radio that i listed to I would LITERALLY write the words down with a same idea and then send it to artist who would sing it... ITS SO FUNNY that we all record things in our brains and then call it creating... THE MORE EXPERIENCES and THINGS WE COPY... THE BETTER THE MUSIC IS. a computer that only plays this TOP MUSIC ATTORNEY will kinda be very boring. shes kinda ironically so blind she doesn't see that her processes and ideas are all done and said before and shes so greedy that she will just jump on some AI band wagon to say the sky is falling. Its not. Why not realize its like when the INTERNET first came out. Do you pay for all the content like Facebook? probably not. CONTENT IS RECORDED BY YOUR BRAIN.. and like AI it just finds where your search engine prefers. LESS CONTENT... NO MONEY for any normal people. IN FACT if Disney land only had come ride one pony ride with no other rides... would you go? NOPE. same thing happens with music and others. There ARE EVEN BIGGER THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT LIKE HOW TO keep PEOPLE not going to war. why not make an ai song for injured veterans who cant sing because of an injury?
I want to make this clear from experience. When you use A.I. with original lyrics, the musical output is generated by the tone, length, and arrangement of your lyrics. For example, if you elongate the word "free" to "freeeee" and you use a heavy metal prompt, the singer is going to scream the word free in a drag out scream of "freeeee", and not just sing free. The same if you write "Iiiiiiiiiii" instead of "I' and so on. If you put brackets [ ] around "oohs and aaahs---depending on the length of what you use: "ooh" or "oooooh" you are going to get totally different harmonies. It goes on and on. You are actually producing and arranging and the A.I. is reacting just like an inhouse band--its not just spitting out patterns. That's why when you use your own lyrics, your work is copyrightable. You are working that song. That music that's being outputted would not exist as it is, or at all in that form. You can put any song released by a label, or Artist in "Google song recognition app", and most time you are going to get 3 or 4 different artists, or songs, on different albums--sometimes more--, that google recognizes. It will recognize no A.I. song. Nobody has done that song in all of life, as A.I. generated it. If you were to input "Funk" in a prompt, every single song is going to have some of the same elements like drums, horns, riffs, patterns etc; because people do the same thing A.I. does, they hear, listen and they create from what they hear and retain. The lyrics, structural and melodies make the difference. The only difference between hiring a live musicians and A.I. to give you backing tracks to lyrics is price and availability. If a sythesizer, or "GarageBand" or Cubase give you music, nobody talks about it not being copyrightable. I've done that. I use A.I. because I get a singer along with the music for free. One last point. I've made songs using A.I. If I can't get my music copyrighted because I used A.I. backing tracks, I'll just separate the music and vocals, and put the thing in a DAW. Throw a tiny bit of reverb on a horn or something, slow or speed it up a tick, and remix. Take about 5 minutes. The music I helped A.I. create is now all mine since it's open domain any way.
your last sentence is your take on this. and only a court can decide if it becomes a court case. no ones ruled yet that a person making a tweak upon an AI generated song, magically looses its AI authorship, just because of user tweaks to the song.
@@gregaiken1725 If a song is not eligible for copyright protection, it is in public domain just like a 200 year old Mozart. Anybody can use it. The only reason to tweak it and remix it is so you can say you had input on it. If it was generated by your lyrics, it makes your case for copyright protection even stronger, although despite people keep trying to deny it because they don't want it to be--a song generated by A.I., using original lyrics, has enough human input to make the whole thing eligible to be copyrighted
Well in order to get exactly wha ti want, not only do i use lyrics, but amend, the stems in a wav to midi converter anyway, and i change the vocalists utilising audimee.. (happy ot credit) you can see teh stuff i do on youtube@spacemanthedj
I actually suggested that they remove the "credit" requirement for paying customers. They said something like "We'll think about it". I didn't think they'd ever actually do it.
Or we ad more layers of Complexity just for the sake of maybe and the love of math.. And Register all the Credits as Some Sort of Exchangeable security
Sorry but Udio can sue me, I use it as a tool like my other tools that I pay for..I'm also a photographer, am I supposed to credit Canon for every photo I sell?
That is my view to DreamTonics's EULA for Synthesizer V Studio Pro and voice models are very sus too, if it runs local and I pay for the software it's mine. Like any other software synth, it's in the name 'Synth'esizer V.
"am I supposed to credit Canon for every photo I sell?" If they let you use a camera for free and that is part of the legal agreement. $10 isn't than much for 1200 song credits, and no need to credit Udio.
let me resume this another way with SIMPLE FACTS : -1 DO NOT PUBLISH INSIDE UDIO keep it private this way NO ONE can copy past. -2 DELETE your creation when you have created them = the service itself can do jack at all when it is done -3 paid a sub + No public published + no more creation inside the service = the song exist only on your hard drive = attribution : jack ! -4 destroy your account when your work is over. -5 Edit your work and add sound effects or anything inside each songs = congratulation it exist only on your hard drive and to be honest : honestly udio act like stupid NFT companies then : F THEM ! I don't credit any software when i work with them. I paid them it is enough. Imagine if a brain doctor you paid, do surgery on you, and brand his name on your forehead. What the hell.
7:27 on udio, you can choose to publish a track, which makes it available to others, a bit like spotify - you can make playlists and heart a track. Once available, free to download, but the creator can unpublish, and it wont be available. Until you publish, its all private. You cant publish if it is from a track you uploaded, because it could produce loads of copyright music.
7:20 yeah any song you publish on Udio can be downloaded with one click from the site. You can even extend someone's song and add a few seconds and now it says you created it.
@@TopMusicAttorney The thing to note there is that only applies to a song that you "publish" on the site -- if you never hit the publish button, I don't think anyone else can ever see it. Publishing basically makes it available for others to discover and stream, like on the "Trending" and "Staff Picks" playlist sections of the home page.
I suggest the copyright and protection and derivative work piece aren't about the outputs, but the code, software, etc used to generate the output. That's the way it's written in that first paragraph under 6.1. It doesn't cover the output, only the technology to generate the output. That paragraph is not really claiming any protection on the outputs. The last line specifically addresses the exclusive right to create derivative works of the services and related content. The licensing is related to the software, subroutines and tech used to create the output, not the output itself. That would not include the output, but would include someone, for example, developing a new skin to feed prompts and pull the output using their code. That new site would be a derivative work of the Udio site, and would be therefore protected. It's pretty standard for licenses for software used to create products - such as word processing, graphics, etc. Their software is protected, but not the products you create with it. In fact, the Copyright provisions about AI would prevent them from claiming copyright on the output. That would include derivatives of AI generated work. I don't see that section addressing output at all, except to include it.
Fair use is the issue here really and how it is interpreted. I made a comment above but the TLDR. if they were using the songs to make midi notes and alayzing the language and then recreating based on decisions it had from the study that would be fair use.......it isn't It is skimming the POST production. the output the essence of the interpretation. 4 chord song isn't protected, ed sheeran case said language is language effectively. however things like baa baa blacksheep and some you used to know vs vanilla ice, underpressure is very different. Its not using the same notes on the same order, its using other peoples production over the top in layers...therefore it is using their product not their formulas. if they could ask for what settings on what VSTs etc or even the information about what the effects used were that would be one thing but it cant it can only humm the tune. like an 8 year old who watched a disney movie and drew a princess VS a scrap book of disney stickers put together in a mish mash to make a new story..... this is sampling. the whole process is SAMPLING for analysis. how people can say this isn't samples are unaware of how music works in a digital world. you cant sens sound over the internet without it being sampled....how the samples are used is more what we would call glitch music in EDM world. a guy called Girltalk basically makes whole songs out of other songs samples.....i believe he had an album called nightripper that would be a close analog for human using samples in layers vs AI using sampled music and painting it in layers. the idea that it is transformative is actually interesting because the algorithms effectively will make things follow a central path of "this is what we decided is correct from our parameters" so in fact the transformation is actually a negative to creativity and should be the reason AI isn't in the creative arts beyond the fact we want to do art normally why take it away from people and give it to AI? well not as TLDR is I thought it was going to be hehe
@@jasonrhodes5034 I disagree. Your claim isn't consistent with how the software works nor is it in line with what the developrs have described. Not to mention, it would be much more difficult to generate the the type of music sampled that it would through using digital representations and patterns, such as with Band in a Box, than with sampling. It sounds far more like you are trying to create an argument to meet the outcome rather than trying to represent the actual process.
I'm only going to use the free version and not "publish" anything directly on the platform, until they figure all this stuff out. For my context I use it to quickly prompt songs for my son's youtube channel. With our original story input and/or lyrics, I state this directly in the TH-cam description with full disclosure of what credit they should get. Thanks for keeping us updated. Very helpful.
Not sure if im talking to the sky but I have some thoughts. I think UDIO are going to make the AI is the future but is only a tool argument which may work because it isn't learning artists its learning trends and such the argument that the record industry should argue is that the training is done with intent to recreate the POST production versions of music. If it was covers or something there is meant to be a license already for the video art so effectively it is fair use for the learning of the music but not for the learning of the post production. See the argument is that music is a language and learning a language is not copyright infringement. this is what the 4 chord song argument with ed sheeran was. How much is universal genre and how much is motif. The argument that he stole the marvin gaye song is sorta right because he covered it and mashed it up before the court case...if fact probably brought it on due to it. The fact is that music is not the expression the way the music is played is the art. Why didn't they teach the AI model using their own instruments and their own musicians. Because they didn't want to create music they wanted to create HITS ie they studied hits and popular things to find the sounds the frequencies they grooves the lyrical melodies the backing singers everything this isn't teaching and adapting this is superimposing an idea on someone else's post production which it effectively jigsawpieces together to fit the framework it gets from the studying. IE its not writing musical notes like a language its is painting shades of the songs it has already heard overlapping layers to get what it thinks is the algorythimic center of the HITS it studied not of the Musical language. this is stolen paint. I am in AI myself and I am a gigging musician for hundreds of gigs. What we need to do is argue that the things AI should be used for are not to be the creative arts where we guide the future. AI having imagination is the reason it will break out of it's ruleset according to scifi. In the end the reality is we need to make sure AI is a tool for humans and not humans being the tool for AI it needs to replace because we are inefficient. the Law should be AI can learn whatever it want s but has zero legal standing. someone makes something it is the person that did it not the AI...they are a pet owner not a client.
23:10 It's probably unique but if you toss a coin 100 times, and someone else tosses a coin 100 times, it's possible that you'll both have the same string of heads and tails. That's just how these gen-AI models work. They pick randomly from a weighted table. Two people might get the same output by chance.
Note on 23:00 in regards to uniqueness of outputs. What they are talking about is that the process is deterministic, 100% the same in, 100% the same out. This is by design and deviations from this are actually considered bugs. You need this both to be able to learn from a consistent system properly without undue randomness, as well as when redoing generations with slightly changed settings to also get ideally only slight difference and not something unique which would be uniquely unhelpful.
Human made parts can be copyrighted….? Suno and Udio have great difficulty creating good music on its own. I have worked with both of these programs and created quite a few incredible pieces. I constructed my own lyrics from long form deep and introspective dialogues that I wrote and perfected, that I then broke down to its essential elements, THEN went to Udio, and Suno, where I had to make adjustments to the lyrics to guide the music. The music is in small part my creation as well as AI was unable to create the music in one go. AI doesn’t really know what is cool. I pump out 1000’s of tracks which SUCK, so I massage the garbage out until it’s super cool. AI didn’t make the final product at all. AI thought the first output was good. It was not good. I had to bend the lyrics and word choice and syllable counts to influence the AI to cooperate with my vision.
What record companies need ro do is lease artist and band profiles so you pay to get Van Halen for your guitar part and his parts directly work with your inputs and music uploads to create a hybrid superhuman guitarist……so you can use the Udio trainers or combine them with artist trainer
You should work for one! You sound like you’d be an asset. They are headed in a similar direction, whereby using AI to make music without the artist needed, or for deceased artists, basically using the “likeness” they own through AI, they could make 10 albums without a need for the artist
Awesome video thank you so much! I have been using “Suno” to create some AI music with vocals but not the lyrics. However, I did use a mixture of my own lyrics and lyrics created with a language learning model. For example: I come up with an idea for a song I want to create and come up with part of the lyrics (the words for the chorus may be one or two lines for a verse) then I use the language learning model like Gemini, copilot, ChatGPT, Perplexity, to collaborate with so I can finish the lyrics for the song. I even go as far to tell language learning model how many verses I want, where I want the chorus where I want the bridge giving it the whole structure. Then it will give me different drafts which include the lyrics I came up with. So from that point I will pick and choose lyrics for what I think represents what I wanted to express in the song. Then I will use those lyrics, labeling each part (intro, verse 1, 2, chorus, bridge, etc…) and copy them into Suno using the custom mode, give it a title, and the genre. I typically create track after track until I finally end up with what I want. I pay for the pro version so it does say I have commercial rights to the output. I may go through 25 to 45 tracks before I finally have something that I think is really good. My main question is; since only part of the lyrics were created by me and the other part was created by the language learning model, How do I, or can I, copyright the lyric portion of the song? And since part of the lyrics were created with a LLM, do I have to define which parts of the lyrics were created by me during the copyright process?
Thank you for this. Would love to see that interview as well with an Udio representative. Maybe even a live stream to field questions from users that can be answered then and there.
Yes, getting the skinny directly from the horses mouth would be a great idea. I instantly frowned upon, and didn't sign up to Udio because of what I read in their copyright policies back in April (I'm used to reading legal speak after having read so many software EULA's for so many years). Went with Suno instead.
as far as I understand once you do inject your own personal hand or style into the work the non copyright thing becomes your copyright, that is as long as it didn't already have a copyright, which she says AI generated does not. This same thing applies to AI generated images.
@@codesslinger yeah I think the AI art companies won for no copyright infringement so maybe we should expect the AI music companies to win too, would be funny to see the labels lose a case, that’s big money so I don’t know..verdicts can sometimes go to the highest bidder
The stuff in the section about advertising , distribution, promo, marketing. I am pretty sure it is for people publishing their creations on the platform. When you publish (something you can do easily by accident on this web site) The track you have done & published is visible by anybody. They can listen your track, see the video generated with your lyrics on it, see your prompt and download it. Yep that's crazy so be careful to not click on that button by accident. Once you have published your stuff, the staff can listen your track and use it to promote their web site if they think that is good enough of course. I imagine they send you a e-mail to ask your permission.
No they don't ask you for permission through an email. One of my husband's tracks hit the staff picks list and he only found out because I noticed it there while browsing that playlist. It did well enough that they sent him a bunch of free credits though.
@@SC-ew2fc you cannot do something really great if you don't do your part and right lyrics (at least a good part of it), download to put all together, add some creative parts on your side then upload it on the site to remix or generate outro or intro. It is as creative as using dvd loops. Things that most artist do since the '90. The difference is you don't have to waste your time & money listening & buying loops cd dvd
If AI music isn't copyrightable, they can claim breach of these terms of service if you use it for commercial purposes, but wouldn't they need to show damages before they could actually sue for substantial money?
It's not breach of service. It says very clearly in the TOS "You may use your Output for both personal and commercial purposes". You can read it clearly in this video at 14:17.
@@sammyfromsydney but if they are not copywritable, doesn’t this mean that every subscriber can just transfer the platform output to anyone else for commercial use?
It's actually a copyright infringement on the artist they ripped off, so how can they claim damages when they themselves have helped cause them... Maybe they should just label these services as toys "for educational purposes only"
some sort of meta tag, maybe audio type which is only discoverable if you know what you are looking for. if its just a data string, it should be easy to find.
question: What if I have a running payment for a sample platform which gives me sub-licenses for each sample (take splice for e.g.) and I make something from these samples and then upload the Verse 1 that I made with these samples to udio to let it "brainstorm" on the "idea". Is this problematic in terms of ownership and terms of service?
Love your content and totally appreciate you taking the time to overview T.O.S. because they are generally way to long and full of legal garbage for me to sit and decipher. Well done!!
Thank you! If you're needing help down the line with your music business, please feel free to reach out to my legal assistant at admin@delgadoentertainmentlaw.com.
For sure reach out and invite a rep from Udio 💯. It would be great to get clarification on certain things. I want to know all the pros and cons, as, I'm nearly 80 songs invested into punk/ metal/ folk you name it on the udio platform. Thanks for the TOS update/ jargon verbage breakdown Looking forward to the show when they come on
Just a point, taking copyrighted lyrics to use in a prompt to see how close the result might be to published music that you don't have the rights to and publishing that on TH-cam is a rights violation made by the poster in violation of Udio's policy.
Interestingly . Kinda cool.. Considering loosing All your work because of one stupid bleebloopblaap. Like one guy insert code and World wide blue screen.. I dont want to think of the awfule bro poljajazzcountry rock
Suno has a radio that lets people listen to songs that are set public or who follow a link to the song. For a person to listen to that song, a copy is downloaded to the listeners device. That is how streaming works. A work made public has an option called "reuse prompt". That takes the lyrics and style prompt and allows that user to create derivative works. They promote public songs on the home page. Kashtanova ruling guidance provided no examples of what sufficient human authorship is and only stated that works generated by AI systems solely in response to user prompts are uncopyrightable. Does the styles prompt change that? Does writing the song yourself? I get near identical works when I use my lyrics as the lyrics seem to shape the song output voice.
@djmaximus3000video Thanks for the support. Please feel free to reach out to me directly and let me know what you're working on at the moment. krystle@topmusicattorney.com
The TOS page on Udio is currently dated May 20, 2024. This is the same date as when I started using the service (in May 2024). Is there something I'm missing in terms of changes to their TOS?
So i write my own lyrics i am not a good singer and if i use their ai singer my work is theirs they can use why and anyone can download what how or they can add if purchase a subscription u can it for commercial purposes
HI @TopMusicAttorney, have you also a video with the Suno's term of service? Or the rules are basically the same? ...and, can I register the copyright in other country, of a song inspired by an Udio/Suno output? (I'm from Italy)
I used to use my own lyrics and post the songs on TH-cam. Then I heard one of my poems being sang to different music. Nothing I could do. I deleted my songs from the channel and then deleted the channel. Now I only use AI generated lyrics.
i appreciate what your doing here. corpos are sneaky with their TOS shit, seems AI wont just yet steal musicians work. Ive watched only half of the video. But Im very wary of uploading a lot of music into Udio, altho ive done that for some shit. i dont like that my songs will be used in training the AI. AI music feels like a law nightmare to deal with at some point. i should get back into making my own music again.
The (apparent bad faith) spirit of this AI company is just the same old, same old, big tech (legal-ish) corporate skimming of intellectual properties. In the visual arts, the same thing happened years ago, when people would use online services to tweak or print their photos onto merch. It was not uncommon for service providers to "try and sneak" ownership of the (often barely modified) uploaded work and recycle that for sale as a separate "library". AI is this, "on steroids".
Udio can term all they want. In a court of law their b.s. terms are not going to supersede federal copyright laws. They have no claims on your original intellectual property no matter what they scribble, that's why I don't worry about it. I don't mind them using my content to train their model, but if they use it any other way, in it's completed copyrighted form--if I got money, they paying me
Musicians have always taken what they have heard both consciously and subconsciously and created something from it. This is exactly what these AI programs are doing. It is a bit rich for American record companies to go after these AI companies when they have been stifling creativity for years which is why everything sounds the same....and nothing sells. It is no surprise that the biggest artists today are Adele, Taylor Swift and Ed Sheeran, all songwriters who can play the guitar and piano when writing songs. Proper music not just a great computer techie who can make Ableton work. And all of them have been brought up listening to various types of music form folk, rock, pop, r and b and it percolated in their heads and out came their own thing. This is no different from Udio.
23:15 - without going into details, what we call AI (and what should be descibed as Artificial NARROW Intelligence) can be understood as a form of a decision-making-tree. Basically "IF you tell me X I do Y, ELSE I do Z" and this a bazillion times over for very miniscule detail - im techically being really ignorant and overly shallow when i describe it like that but this at least tells you what happens internally. If you tell it "i want dark pop" it will look at what it learned about dark pop and create a track that has the main components of a dark pop song. Now, how does that come into play when you ask "why cant it be unique?": ANI can only be as diverse as its trainingdata and it technically cant innovate, only repackage whats already been there. Similar to you throwing a bunch of dice and writing down the results, given enough time of repacking the same basic components you will at some point get an output thats virtually indistinguishable from a result you had once before that. Another Example: think of blindly mixing the Colours Yellow and Blue: there is only so many new shades of green you can create before you encounter one thats virtually indistinguishable from one that has already been there - and you can NEVER create colours that contain red.
Meta suspended my facebook page for copyright.. which the songs are mine from paid subscription to Udio.. Facebook suspended me... Should i sue Meta???
@@TopMusicAttorney They reinstated my account this morning.. I gave them a warning if it happens again I will not be using there services no more... Thanks..
I’m wondering if Suno/udio lose the lawsuit what will happen to all producers who’ve used these ai tools in major placement songs or just regular ppl who make music with suno.. will they be allowed to keep royalties? And Keep songs up on commercial platforms? Will they have a clause that after the loss from hereafter no more ai music allowed on platforms and if they’re are then lawsuits would happen? Are they gonna sue millions of ppl? Because that’s kind of impossible
I bought one month’s subscription to one of the music A.I. platforms and I generated a large number or songs from both original lyrics and other prompts for the purpose a building a library or an idea bucket. I then transcribe songs which I consider worthwhile or interesting and I rearrange them, alter structure, add or remove what I deem my artist liberty to do so an finally I re-record them. Question; in the case of wanting to protect my new written scores and/or recordings what proof of ownership do I need to present for copyright registration? (Bill of sale receipt?) Secondly, if American legislation prohibits copyright registration of any A.I. generated material, what legality prohibits anyone from using the material for commercial purposes and/or claiming it as their own? A quick note: I do not live in the USA.😎
What if its instrumental? What if you then take it into proclduction software, stem it, peoduce andmix it, add some effects and then output? Is it not then YOURS?
When you create anything on suno it has a button next to it that says "public" click it if you want the world to see it. That's when they may use your work. I never click public.
I see many users who are downloading published songs other usres and using them commercialy via DistroKid on youtube and other platforms. But what rights Udio's user have when someone downloeded his published AI song over platform and registred as own?
❤ Video excellent: please can having music on SoundCloud be a problem if it is also posted on DistroKid? I have not yet activated monetization on SoundCloud: can you clarify this point for me? I would not like to make mistakes. Many thanks
QUESTION: If a town says it's suddenly ILLEGAL to chew gum while walking on the street, and it's NOT LEGALLY retroactive, HOW are TOS retroactive? If I can curse on XYS and then they say you can't - HOW is it OK/Legal for them to take down stuff retroactively especially if they don't specifically state as much in the original/previous TOS, and if you don't have an option to OPT OUT (must accept to keep your previous works) or lose you're stuff/get cancelled??????
QUESTION: What if you create a song under the FREE VERSION then go to PAID - does that exclude or include that song? QUESTION: I've tried with my own legal learning to figure this out when it comes to Sunno (yah I did one with Paid Version but I wrote the lyrics and input the music style with intro music and verses/chourus/etc) and am still so confused. It actually did what I envisioned .... and am planning on publishing it regardless of it being copyrighted...
One loophole would be to add more music as an intro or outro once you are a member, then “technically” it’s a new track. You don’t even have to use the new stuff you add, you can choose to edit it down to what you want to use later.
@@ReigneNation Well the catch with all ai is only human creativity can be copyrighted. Meaning you *must* use your own lyrics or you can’t claim ownership rights for anything ai music. As far as TOS, who knows, they don’t actually know what they can even enforce and none of this has ever existed before, and they have no real way to enforce anything at all yet. So it’s best to play it safe always, but who knows.
@@ghost-user559 But HOW was AI created? Via HUMANS, and if a HUMAN does some input, does that not kick in the copyright? I'm seriously asking cuz I mad a song via AI with DAW- I wrote the lyrics/melody and though I can't play biango I did it.
@@ReigneNation Basically kind of. They already have made the rules that the ai stuff cannot be copyrighted because we did not perform it, but you can own the lyrics that you wrote. So it’s a weird situation. Basically if you do enough human stuff, you own that, even though you don’t technically have the copyright on the ai parts. Like if the ai sings it, but you write the lyrics, you own the songwriting license but not the recording itself. So if a person makes the lyrics but the ai sings it, you own the lyrics copyright but technically no one owns the ai performance, not even you. So basically we are splitting ownership with someone that doesn’t technically exist, so it’s basically still ours, but only the human parts. It’s very confusing because it’s all still new.
One last note to add to my previous comment. When on an A.I site I erase everything generated and do not publish anything on their platform for what ever it is worth.
A certain music platform with a green icon made it impossible for me to listen to my own music files unless I uploaded them. As a music engineer I do not have the relevant artist permission. I deleted the app and I had access to my files again. I am only aware of one other person noticing this.
going by current laws, the argument could be made that nothing we create using technology can be under copyright,no book,no image,no song,being that technology is ai and ai is technology and we use technology for everything we create.
I don't know why they keeping the issue confused. If you wrote all the lyrics or even most, you can copyright the song. The government ruling says that an A.I. work is eligible based on the amount of human input. So if you use all A.I. lyrics, but you did the music and arranging etc;--you can copyright the song--and so on.
@@TeeCee-qq4ev As of now: you own the part you did. So if you only input the lyrics. you only own the lyrics. The copyright laws haven't caught up yet to include prompting as "human input". It's still being debated. But in my opinion, it should be like a photographer. He aimed the camera, and pressed the click button yet still gets a copyright on the picture that the machine created.
So....I am a smart guy...but not in these legal whirlpools...🤔🤔😒😒😱😱😪😪 I use SUNO, As a paying subscriber, I write ALL the lyrics and I arrange the song and I give SUNO prompts in what style, male or female singer etc etc and SUNO creates the music with my lyrics and instructions to a song. In my mind - this is my song - I upload it to ALL the streaming services, in a believe I can to this - cause....well that's how I understood it. I can do that. Have I gotten it all wrong? Do I do something I am not allowed to??? And by the way... The lawsuit from "the music industry" - that's just pathetic! They are just pissing their territory and clawing for keeping their position as a monopoly - sad and pathetic! They dont give a shit about me or any other big or small artist - they just think about the money they make! ...
We Want To Know The Rules, Udio !!!! Is that too much to ask for? I wrote the lyrics, everything else is Udio --for a very good example. Well, Mr Udio spokesperson appearing on TMA ? Can I copyright the damn song? What should I include in my submission to Copyright office? Can I say distribute my song as, title: "Udio is Legit" by me? And -- do I own everything? Thanks !!!
Many species of animals use music to communicate. Starlings, for example, don't get sued for copying car alarms. If this BS continues, humans are the first and only species to be prohibited to produce music.
I think the only reason to have a Udio representative on would be to grill them about the training data and watch them squirm as a form of cathartic entertainment.
Interesting part about registering machine generated works along with human works. I had a thought, do melodies released using random algorithms also count as "not human" made? A lot of DAWs and devices have random tools... no ai but not human.
Q. if you write lyrics, then you sing them into your phone like you suggested (to get instant CW in normal circumstances) then you upload lyrics to udio, make song (date and time stamped CW lyrics!) is this not protected ? I would not be able to upload lyrics to MJ Thriller and create a new song based on those lyrics for obvious reasons ! but i could if I was M jackson, and based on the terms it looks like MJ would not own full CW, looks like possibly UDIO does. lol - very confusing as its unclear what exactly is protected/unprotected going forward? it should say in terms that "USER" 100% owns the lyrics if they wrote them.
I would think that if one was to have a major international hit or hits using A.I. material and then finds himself or herself in a law suit for copyright infringement I would think that their TERMS OF SERVICE could be refuted as abusive and predatory in a court of law. A contract between two parties, by it’s nature, implies negotiated terms! Secondly, there seem to be a huge contradiction in this whole discussion! If one is refused copyright registration by the US Government for material generated by A.I. therefor I cannot sue anybody for using the paid material or other? So why do they seem to think they are entitled to take someone to court for using their unpaid A.I. and claim damages? Could somebody explain this to me slowly like if I was a six year old child? In the case of their TERMS OF SERVICE they try impose in the public market place is not an automatic right to sue or whatever else they feel they are entitled to. I am sure that sooner or later the authorities will step in and resolve this whole mess about legalities regarding the use of A.I. and who owns what.
Or cancel by using the account settings page... you even had that highlighted. Emailing to cancel would be for the account of someone who died or otherwise can't access the account. Edit - Not unique? Flip ten coins a bunch of times. You're eventually going to have the same ten flips as a previous attempt.
Regarding "inspiration": I brought this up (via my other channel) before. Jonny Lang v Stevie Ray Vaughn The kid clearly used SRV as inspiration. SRV acknowledged it and was not only impressed but was flattered as well. JL (as a kid when he first came out) was/is very talented. All musicians are "inspired" by others - so how does this legally work? If I find some song that "sounds" or "reminds" me of something I created (with or w/out copyright) could I possibly sue? This is where this issue gets convoluted - with using words such as "inspiration." Regardless of it being from AI or human, isn't most everything (not just music) "inspired" from previous works (Shakespeare comes to mind).... Would a Jury comprehend this 'technicality' issue or are they more likely to get it wrong, siding w/ big music labels etc instead of the artists?
Thing is, how does one get “inspiration?” You buy tapes, vinyls, cd’s, steam on Spotify, listen on the radio, buy concert tickets or even sheet music. The artists are still remunerated even indirectly. What does AI do? It scrapes the entirety of human recorded music for free, then releases content that directly competes with its training data by eating into the finite royalty pool. Fair use is multi-faceted - and this AI music just simply does not adhere to all of it.
Suno has inaudible watermarks in their songs.. that’s how they know if you used their services .. I’m thinking Udio has the same thing going on to keep track of ppl using these apps
For me the question is... Even if you use sth created in Udio, but you are a really small artist. And than, you take part created in Udio into your DAW and simply rearange it, change pitch, speed, etc. You add your own parts, played on different instruments, etc. Thank you have a finished track and upload it to streaming services. How are they going to find out that you used sth created in Udio, when there are so many tracks uploaded every single day! Is it possible? I really doubt that.
Interesting question.. If you generate a song by AI - and after that, you "recreate" this song: Is the song made by a human? or - is it just a coversong of a creation of a computer - and so - it isn`t under copyright ? Or - in theory - you make a melody - but someone can prove, that an Ai has made a melody like this before (what may be - with millions of generations every day)... I guess things will get a little complicated by this..
Provenance has to be handed down on paper. There is even a clause about liquid ink. It's a Magna Carta thing. The other safety method is to send yourself a copy via registered mail. That stamp is irrefutable.
Wow yu did it again so infomative & meticulously delicious with your expertise! Always enlightened with your content of knowledge!! Ty for making me smarter all the time!😂❤
There is tech being developed to help tag music that contains generative AI and can even link it to specific providers (Udio, Suno. Etc). People trying to pass off music as a “human made” will probably find there stuff labelled as “AI generated” in the very near future.
The "if you are a subscriber" thing is ambiguous and open to interpretation. What if I subscribe for 1 month, generate 400 songs and then cancel my membership... those 400 songs had been generated whilst I was a subscriber, so? Is that OK? If not, then what's the time limit? If I release one of those 3 years later, how would they know it was made during my 1 month? What if I've been a subscriber for 2 years, publish 300 songs over that period and then end my subscription, do I lose these subscriber rights to that work? If not, then someone should be able to subscribe for 1 month and rinse the platform for endless content to use for years after they end the membership
Have you release music made with AI?
🟡 Become your Own Record Label:
www.topmusicattorney.com/becomeyourownrecordlabel
🟢 Free Split Sheet Template: www.topmusicattorney.com/splitsheet
📄 Music Contracts Templates: www.topmusicattorney.com/music-contracts
📺 Get Your Music Into Tv/Film/Games: www.topmusicattorney.com/sync
💻 #1 Resource For Artists And Producers: www.topmusicattorney.com
⚖ Hire An Attorney: www.delgadoentertainmentlaw.com
📰 Get My Newsletter: www.topmusicattorney.com/newsletter/
🎧 Listen To The TMA Podcast On All Streaming: www.topmusicattorney.com/podcast
YOU LITTERALLY HAVE TO COPY THE PERSONS MUSIC. THEN WRITE THEIR LYRICS INTO AN AI PROGRAM... ITS JUST LIKE COPYING A LYRIC FROM YOUR SONG THEN PUTTING IT INTO YOUR DAW AND SAYING THE SKY IS FALLING. FOR EXSAMPLE... YOU SAY YOU ARE A CREATOR... BUT YOU COPY EVERYONES MIDIS AND WORDS AND IDEAS FROM THE RADIO. IF YOU ARE A LAWYER YOU COPY WHAT YOUR TEACHERS TOLD YOU TO SAY... BUT YOU ARE SO GREEDY THAT YOU PRETEND THAT YOUR HELPING AND TRYING TO CARE ABOUT BUT... AUTOMATION with every song saying neon is kinda dumb. humans are so dumb and boring if they only use one rock to pound on the same thing. COVER SONGS ARE COPYING... AND LITTERALLY PLAGERISM LIKE YOU DO.
SOUNDS LIKE DISNEY SHOULD LISTEN TO YOUR MUSIC AND SUE YOU. YOU LITTERALLY COPY THE WORDS.
I actually have. I created a fake 80s New Wave band called "Neon Dream" and released a track called "Haunted" from them.
You should have someone from Suno come on as well. These terms need to be defined and updated as they don't reflect how people are engaging, sampling, recreating and desiring distribution of works with AI - Thanks for all your hard work! Maybe a video about the differences of using Suno vs Udio would be worth having as I wonder myself how similar these terms are. What are the defining factors or using one over the other.
@@djbigdad 20 years ago i used to sit and take all the radio that i listed to I would LITERALLY write the words down with a same idea and then send it to artist who would sing it... ITS SO FUNNY that we all record things in our brains and then call it creating... THE MORE EXPERIENCES and THINGS WE COPY... THE BETTER THE MUSIC IS. a computer that only plays this TOP MUSIC ATTORNEY will kinda be very boring. shes kinda ironically so blind she doesn't see that her processes and ideas are all done and said before and shes so greedy that she will just jump on some AI band wagon to say the sky is falling. Its not. Why not realize its like when the INTERNET first came out. Do you pay for all the content like Facebook? probably not. CONTENT IS RECORDED BY YOUR BRAIN.. and like AI it just finds where your search engine prefers. LESS CONTENT... NO MONEY for any normal people. IN FACT if Disney land only had come ride one pony ride with no other rides... would you go? NOPE. same thing happens with music and others. There ARE EVEN BIGGER THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT LIKE HOW TO keep PEOPLE not going to war. why not make an ai song for injured veterans who cant sing because of an injury?
I want to make this clear from experience. When you use A.I. with original lyrics, the musical output is generated by the tone, length, and arrangement of your lyrics. For example, if you elongate the word "free" to "freeeee" and you use a heavy metal prompt, the singer is going to scream the word free in a drag out scream of "freeeee", and not just sing free. The same if you write "Iiiiiiiiiii" instead of "I' and so on.
If you put brackets [ ] around "oohs and aaahs---depending on the length of what you use: "ooh" or "oooooh" you are going to get totally different harmonies. It goes on and on.
You are actually producing and arranging and the A.I. is reacting just like an inhouse band--its not just spitting out patterns. That's why when you use your own lyrics, your work is copyrightable. You are working that song. That music that's being outputted would not exist as it is, or at all in that form.
You can put any song released by a label, or Artist in "Google song recognition app", and most time you are going to get 3 or 4 different artists, or songs, on different albums--sometimes more--, that google recognizes.
It will recognize no A.I. song. Nobody has done that song in all of life, as A.I. generated it.
If you were to input "Funk" in a prompt, every single song is going to have some of the same elements like drums, horns, riffs, patterns etc; because people do the same thing A.I. does, they hear, listen and they create from what they hear and retain. The lyrics, structural and melodies make the difference.
The only difference between hiring a live musicians
and A.I. to give you backing tracks to lyrics is price and availability.
If a sythesizer, or "GarageBand" or Cubase give you music, nobody talks about it not being copyrightable.
I've done that. I use A.I. because I get a singer along with the music for free.
One last point. I've made songs using A.I. If I can't get my music copyrighted because I used A.I. backing tracks, I'll just separate the music and vocals, and put the thing in a DAW. Throw a tiny bit of reverb on a horn or something, slow or speed it up a tick, and remix.
Take about 5 minutes. The music I helped A.I. create is now all mine since it's open domain any way.
I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens in a few court cases to find out what the actual limits are.
your last sentence is your take on this. and only a court can decide if it becomes a court case. no ones ruled yet that a person making a tweak upon an AI generated song, magically looses its AI authorship, just because of user tweaks to the song.
@@gregaiken1725 If a song is not eligible for copyright protection, it is in public domain just like a 200 year old Mozart.
Anybody can use it. The only reason to tweak it and remix it is so you can say you had input on it. If it was generated by your lyrics, it makes your case for copyright protection even stronger, although despite people keep trying to deny it because they don't want it to be--a song generated by A.I., using original lyrics, has enough human input to make the whole thing eligible to be copyrighted
Well in order to get exactly wha ti want, not only do i use lyrics, but amend, the stems in a wav to midi converter anyway, and i change the vocalists utilising audimee.. (happy ot credit) you can see teh stuff i do on youtube@spacemanthedj
It's not for free. You have to get a monthly subscription to get rights to make commercial use of the songs.
Yes an interview with a Udio employee would be great. Thanks
I actually suggested that they remove the "credit" requirement for paying customers. They said something like "We'll think about it". I didn't think they'd ever actually do it.
great request - that saves us the irritation, not like it was unreasonable, just would get annoying finding where exactly to do that.
Or we ad more layers of Complexity just for the sake of maybe and the love of math.. And Register all the Credits as Some Sort of Exchangeable security
Awesome!
Sorry but Udio can sue me, I use it as a tool like my other tools that I pay for..I'm also a photographer, am I supposed to credit Canon for every photo I sell?
That is my view to DreamTonics's EULA for Synthesizer V Studio Pro and voice models are very sus too, if it runs local and I pay for the software it's mine. Like any other software synth, it's in the name 'Synth'esizer V.
"am I supposed to credit Canon for every photo I sell?"
If they let you use a camera for free and that is part of the legal agreement.
$10 isn't than much for 1200 song credits, and no need to credit Udio.
@@IgnorantGenius I have a pro account, but I take your point about the free account
@@PaulCarmona With a pro account you don't need to credit Udio. Not sure if you caught that in the video.
@@IgnorantGenius Yes, I realised afterwards, thanks
let me resume this another way with SIMPLE FACTS :
-1 DO NOT PUBLISH INSIDE UDIO keep it private this way NO ONE can copy past.
-2 DELETE your creation when you have created them = the service itself can do jack at all when it is done
-3 paid a sub + No public published + no more creation inside the service = the song exist only on your hard drive = attribution : jack !
-4 destroy your account when your work is over.
-5 Edit your work and add sound effects or anything inside each songs = congratulation it exist only on your hard drive
and to be honest :
honestly udio act like stupid NFT companies then : F THEM ! I don't credit any software when i work with them. I paid them it is enough. Imagine if a brain doctor you paid, do surgery on you, and brand his name on your forehead. What the hell.
7:27 on udio, you can choose to publish a track, which makes it available to others, a bit like spotify - you can make playlists and heart a track. Once available, free to download, but the creator can unpublish, and it wont be available. Until you publish, its all private. You cant publish if it is from a track you uploaded, because it could produce loads of copyright music.
7:20 yeah any song you publish on Udio can be downloaded with one click from the site. You can even extend someone's song and add a few seconds and now it says you created it.
Oh wow! That's really helpful information, thank you for sharing 🙏
@@TopMusicAttorney The thing to note there is that only applies to a song that you "publish" on the site -- if you never hit the publish button, I don't think anyone else can ever see it. Publishing basically makes it available for others to discover and stream, like on the "Trending" and "Staff Picks" playlist sections of the home page.
@@TopMusicAttorneyyou can do the same with Suno
@@brianharrod4124 Only if you publish your track, which I never would think of doing.
You can’t publish works based on your uploaded content. The UI won’t allow you to do that.
I suggest the copyright and protection and derivative work piece aren't about the outputs, but the code, software, etc used to generate the output. That's the way it's written in that first paragraph under 6.1. It doesn't cover the output, only the technology to generate the output. That paragraph is not really claiming any protection on the outputs. The last line specifically addresses the exclusive right to create derivative works of the services and related content. The licensing is related to the software, subroutines and tech used to create the output, not the output itself. That would not include the output, but would include someone, for example, developing a new skin to feed prompts and pull the output using their code. That new site would be a derivative work of the Udio site, and would be therefore protected. It's pretty standard for licenses for software used to create products - such as word processing, graphics, etc. Their software is protected, but not the products you create with it. In fact, the Copyright provisions about AI would prevent them from claiming copyright on the output. That would include derivatives of AI generated work. I don't see that section addressing output at all, except to include it.
Definitely include outputs, as you can set them public. Guess what people can do with a public song?
Fair use is the issue here really and how it is interpreted. I made a comment above but the TLDR. if they were using the songs to make midi notes and alayzing the language and then recreating based on decisions it had from the study that would be fair use.......it isn't It is skimming the POST production. the output the essence of the interpretation. 4 chord song isn't protected, ed sheeran case said language is language effectively. however things like baa baa blacksheep and some you used to know vs vanilla ice, underpressure is very different. Its not using the same notes on the same order, its using other peoples production over the top in layers...therefore it is using their product not their formulas. if they could ask for what settings on what VSTs etc or even the information about what the effects used were that would be one thing but it cant it can only humm the tune. like an 8 year old who watched a disney movie and drew a princess VS a scrap book of disney stickers put together in a mish mash to make a new story.....
this is sampling. the whole process is SAMPLING for analysis. how people can say this isn't samples are unaware of how music works in a digital world. you cant sens sound over the internet without it being sampled....how the samples are used is more what we would call glitch music in EDM world. a guy called Girltalk basically makes whole songs out of other songs samples.....i believe he had an album called nightripper that would be a close analog for human using samples in layers vs AI using sampled music and painting it in layers. the idea that it is transformative is actually interesting because the algorithms effectively will make things follow a central path of "this is what we decided is correct from our parameters" so in fact the transformation is actually a negative to creativity and should be the reason AI isn't in the creative arts beyond the fact we want to do art normally why take it away from people and give it to AI?
well not as TLDR is I thought it was going to be hehe
@@jasonrhodes5034 I disagree. Your claim isn't consistent with how the software works nor is it in line with what the developrs have described. Not to mention, it would be much more difficult to generate the the type of music sampled that it would through using digital representations and patterns, such as with Band in a Box, than with sampling. It sounds far more like you are trying to create an argument to meet the outcome rather than trying to represent the actual process.
It would be great to have somone from Udio on the show to answer some of our questions.
I'm only going to use the free version and not "publish" anything directly on the platform, until they figure all this stuff out. For my context I use it to quickly prompt songs for my son's youtube channel. With our original story input and/or lyrics, I state this directly in the TH-cam description with full disclosure of what credit they should get. Thanks for keeping us updated. Very helpful.
Thats cool Dad, but guess who has more subs than you now! hahah.
@@riversadventure Technically your Dad's helping you out
Not sure if im talking to the sky but I have some thoughts.
I think UDIO are going to make the AI is the future but is only a tool argument which may work because it isn't learning artists its learning trends and such the argument that the record industry should argue is that the training is done with intent to recreate the POST production versions of music. If it was covers or something there is meant to be a license already for the video art so effectively it is fair use for the learning of the music but not for the learning of the post production.
See the argument is that music is a language and learning a language is not copyright infringement. this is what the 4 chord song argument with ed sheeran was. How much is universal genre and how much is motif. The argument that he stole the marvin gaye song is sorta right because he covered it and mashed it up before the court case...if fact probably brought it on due to it. The fact is that music is not the expression the way the music is played is the art.
Why didn't they teach the AI model using their own instruments and their own musicians. Because they didn't want to create music they wanted to create HITS ie they studied hits and popular things to find the sounds the frequencies they grooves the lyrical melodies the backing singers everything this isn't teaching and adapting this is superimposing an idea on someone else's post production which it effectively jigsawpieces together to fit the framework it gets from the studying. IE its not writing musical notes like a language its is painting shades of the songs it has already heard overlapping layers to get what it thinks is the algorythimic center of the HITS it studied not of the Musical language.
this is stolen paint.
I am in AI myself and I am a gigging musician for hundreds of gigs. What we need to do is argue that the things AI should be used for are not to be the creative arts where we guide the future. AI having imagination is the reason it will break out of it's ruleset according to scifi. In the end the reality is we need to make sure AI is a tool for humans and not humans being the tool for AI it needs to replace because we are inefficient.
the Law should be AI can learn whatever it want s but has zero legal standing. someone makes something it is the person that did it not the AI...they are a pet owner not a client.
Thanks [TOP] for the deep dive...Yes we want more clarification for later down the line, for the big catalog sale...lol👍🔨
23:10 It's probably unique but if you toss a coin 100 times, and someone else tosses a coin 100 times, it's possible that you'll both have the same string of heads and tails. That's just how these gen-AI models work. They pick randomly from a weighted table. Two people might get the same output by chance.
Good example!
Not if they use their own lyrics. Impossible unless they wrote the exact same words.
Note on 23:00 in regards to uniqueness of outputs. What they are talking about is that the process is deterministic, 100% the same in, 100% the same out. This is by design and deviations from this are actually considered bugs. You need this both to be able to learn from a consistent system properly without undue randomness, as well as when redoing generations with slightly changed settings to also get ideally only slight difference and not something unique which would be uniquely unhelpful.
Human made parts can be copyrighted….? Suno and Udio have great difficulty creating good music on its own. I have worked with both of these programs and created quite a few incredible pieces. I constructed my own lyrics from long form deep and introspective dialogues that I wrote and perfected, that I then broke down to its essential elements, THEN went to Udio, and Suno, where I had to make adjustments to the lyrics to guide the music. The music is in small part my creation as well as AI was unable to create the music in one go. AI doesn’t really know what is cool. I pump out 1000’s of tracks which SUCK, so I massage the garbage out until it’s super cool. AI didn’t make the final product at all. AI thought the first output was good. It was not good.
I had to bend the lyrics and word choice and syllable counts to influence the AI to cooperate with my vision.
What record companies need ro do is lease artist and band profiles so you pay to get Van Halen for your guitar part and his parts directly work with your inputs and music uploads to create a hybrid superhuman guitarist……so you can use the Udio trainers or combine them with artist trainer
You should work for one! You sound like you’d be an asset. They are headed in a similar direction, whereby using AI to make music without the artist needed, or for deceased artists, basically using the “likeness” they own through AI, they could make 10 albums without a need for the artist
Awesome video thank you so much! I have been using “Suno” to create some AI music with vocals but not the lyrics. However, I did use a mixture of my own lyrics and lyrics created with a language learning model. For example: I come up with an idea for a song I want to create and come up with part of the lyrics (the words for the chorus may be one or two lines for a verse) then I use the language learning model like Gemini, copilot, ChatGPT, Perplexity, to collaborate with so I can finish the lyrics for the song. I even go as far to tell language learning model how many verses I want, where I want the chorus where I want the bridge giving it the whole structure. Then it will give me different drafts which include the lyrics I came up with. So from that point I will pick and choose lyrics for what I think represents what I wanted to express in the song. Then I will use those lyrics, labeling each part (intro, verse 1, 2, chorus, bridge, etc…) and copy them into Suno using the custom mode, give it a title, and the genre. I typically create track after track until I finally end up with what I want. I pay for the pro version so it does say I have commercial rights to the output. I may go through 25 to 45 tracks before I finally have something that I think is really good. My main question is; since only part of the lyrics were created by me and the other part was created by the language learning model, How do I, or can I, copyright the lyric portion of the song? And since part of the lyrics were created with a LLM, do I have to define which parts of the lyrics were created by me during the copyright process?
@@brianharrod4124 if you find an answer, please let me know. I have a similar workflow. 🤔
Thank you for this. Would love to see that interview as well with an Udio representative. Maybe even a live stream to field questions from users that can be answered then and there.
Yes, getting the skinny directly from the horses mouth would be a great idea. I instantly frowned upon, and didn't sign up to Udio because of what I read in their copyright policies back in April (I'm used to reading legal speak after having read so many software EULA's for so many years). Went with Suno instead.
Just wow! This is really good info- Thanks for doing that. Oh yea, great channel!
Thank you for the support. Please feel free to drop a note and let me know what you're working on.
would love for you to have a UDIO rep on your show
you need to invite both Udio AND a rep from US copyright office simultaneously
Hey Miss K. Love the channel, Love the content. Would Love... to see you rip through Suno's TOS sometime. Keep up the good work.
What if - you sample some Udio stuff and modify it with effects, editing, etc… where it sounds like something different.
If the AI companies win this case then we can scrape their content, which is scraped from labels, then run it through some AI tool, then it’s ours!!
as far as I understand once you do inject your own personal hand or style into the work the non copyright thing becomes your copyright, that is as long as it didn't already have a copyright, which she says AI generated does not. This same thing applies to AI generated images.
@@aelius_audio lol
@@codesslinger yeah I think the AI art companies won for no copyright infringement so maybe we should expect the AI music companies to win too, would be funny to see the labels lose a case, that’s big money so I don’t know..verdicts can sometimes go to the highest bidder
Would you recommend publishing music on Udio or just download it and sell it on streaming platforms?
The stuff in the section about advertising , distribution, promo, marketing. I am pretty sure it is for people publishing their creations on the platform. When you publish (something you can do easily by accident on this web site) The track you have done & published is visible by anybody. They can listen your track, see the video generated with your lyrics on it, see your prompt and download it. Yep that's crazy so be careful to not click on that button by accident. Once you have published your stuff, the staff can listen your track and use it to promote their web site if they think that is good enough of course. I imagine they send you a e-mail to ask your permission.
No they don't ask you for permission through an email. One of my husband's tracks hit the staff picks list and he only found out because I noticed it there while browsing that playlist. It did well enough that they sent him a bunch of free credits though.
The irony of AI music generator users being scared that their generations will be used without their consent.
@@SC-ew2fc you cannot do something really great if you don't do your part and right lyrics (at least a good part of it), download to put all together, add some creative parts on your side then upload it on the site to remix or generate outro or intro. It is as creative as using dvd loops. Things that most artist do since the '90. The difference is you don't have to waste your time & money listening & buying loops cd dvd
If AI music isn't copyrightable, they can claim breach of these terms of service if you use it for commercial purposes, but wouldn't they need to show damages before they could actually sue for substantial money?
It's not breach of service. It says very clearly in the TOS "You may use your Output for both personal and commercial purposes". You can read it clearly in this video at 14:17.
@@rinasstories I believe that is only paid subscribers. Certainly true for Suno which is the service I use.
@@sammyfromsydney but if they are not copywritable, doesn’t this mean that every subscriber can just transfer the platform output to anyone else for commercial use?
It's actually a copyright infringement on the artist they ripped off, so how can they claim damages when they themselves have helped cause them... Maybe they should just label these services as toys "for educational purposes only"
This was awesome! Thanks for your hard work as usual
@arvindbeeharry8214 Thanks for the kind words; please join us tonight at 5 pm PST for our YT Livestream!
@@TopMusicAttorney I'd love to but I'm based in Mauritius. I think we're 10 hours ahead of you sunshine!
Im based in London…Love what you do, good job… How do they know if the music you add to your TH-cam video is from there network? Free or commercial? ❤
some sort of meta tag, maybe audio type which is only discoverable if you know what you are looking for. if its just a data string, it should be easy to find.
Most def have a Udio rep on your show!
Thanks for your valuable info!
Thank you for your support; are you working on anything at the moment?
Those storage rights would also have to extend to hosting services they use and backup services.
Yes. Let's get someone from Udio for an Interview.
Thank you ❤
question: What if I have a running payment for a sample platform which gives me sub-licenses for each sample (take splice for e.g.) and I make something from these samples and then upload the Verse 1 that I made with these samples to udio to let it "brainstorm" on the "idea". Is this problematic in terms of ownership and terms of service?
Are you aware of our TH-cam Livestreams? Every Wednesday at 5 pm PST? Please join tomorrow; we try to answer as many questions as possible.
Love your content and totally appreciate you taking the time to overview T.O.S. because they are generally way to long and full of legal garbage for me to sit and decipher. Well done!!
Thank you! If you're needing help down the line with your music business, please feel free to reach out to my legal assistant at admin@delgadoentertainmentlaw.com.
thanks for this. Please keep up the good work
For sure reach out and invite a rep from Udio 💯.
It would be great to get clarification on certain things.
I want to know all the pros and cons, as, I'm nearly 80 songs invested into punk/ metal/ folk you name it on the udio platform.
Thanks for the TOS update/ jargon verbage breakdown
Looking forward to the show when they come on
Just a point, taking copyrighted lyrics to use in a prompt to see how close the result might be to published music that you don't have the rights to and publishing that on TH-cam is a rights violation made by the poster in violation of Udio's policy.
Interestingly . Kinda cool.. Considering loosing All your work because of one stupid bleebloopblaap. Like one guy insert code and World wide blue screen.. I dont want to think of the awfule bro poljajazzcountry rock
@@AMPProf You would only lose any work you don't download and back up files...
Suno has a radio that lets people listen to songs that are set public or who follow a link to the song. For a person to listen to that song, a copy is downloaded to the listeners device. That is how streaming works.
A work made public has an option called "reuse prompt". That takes the lyrics and style prompt and allows that user to create derivative works.
They promote public songs on the home page.
Kashtanova ruling guidance provided no examples of what sufficient human authorship is and only stated that works generated by AI systems solely in response to user prompts are uncopyrightable. Does the styles prompt change that? Does writing the song yourself? I get near identical works when I use my lyrics as the lyrics seem to shape the song output voice.
Going to share this, listen with friends. Thx
Thanks for the support and spreading the word!
INSTANT FOLLOW. You are amazing. and Thank you for your work!
@djmaximus3000video Thanks for the support. Please feel free to reach out to me directly and let me know what you're working on at the moment. krystle@topmusicattorney.com
If I don't publish songs on udio, can they still use my input in others' songs, or is it simply used for training purposes?
Even if I write all my own lyrics?
Please get someone from UDIO and SUNO on your show…maybe the same show! That’ll break the net
The TOS page on Udio is currently dated May 20, 2024. This is the same date as when I started using the service (in May 2024). Is there something I'm missing in terms of changes to their TOS?
Wonderful video...thank you!
Thank you for watching! Live every Wednesday at 5:00 p.m. PST if you want to stop by and say hi 🙌
So i write my own lyrics i am not a good singer and if i use their ai singer my work is theirs they can use why and anyone can download what how or they can add if purchase a subscription u can it for commercial purposes
HI @TopMusicAttorney, have you also a video with the Suno's term of service? Or the rules are basically the same? ...and, can I register the copyright in other country, of a song inspired by an Udio/Suno output? (I'm from Italy)
I used to use my own lyrics and post the songs on TH-cam. Then I heard one of my poems being sang to different music. Nothing I could do. I deleted my songs from the channel and then deleted the channel. Now I only use AI generated lyrics.
Interesting stuff. I wish I could just get it to sing. I dont want a whole song. I lost my voice and still want to make music.
If you have previously recorded copies of your voice you can clone it using Eleven Labs, then create new songs using your voice ❤
with a paid service, you can create a song, and just download the part you want (vocals, bass, drums, or other). Those are called stems.
When will you post your interview with thatcompany? I want to hear that answer
What about the "input content" used to train their model in the first place??
Fair use, as learning isn't theft.
i appreciate what your doing here. corpos are sneaky with their TOS shit, seems AI wont just yet steal musicians work. Ive watched only half of the video. But Im very wary of uploading a lot of music into Udio, altho ive done that for some shit. i dont like that my songs will be used in training the AI. AI music feels like a law nightmare to deal with at some point. i should get back into making my own music again.
The (apparent bad faith) spirit of this AI company is just the same old, same old, big tech (legal-ish) corporate skimming of intellectual properties. In the visual arts, the same thing happened years ago, when people would use online services to tweak or print their photos onto merch. It was not uncommon for service providers to "try and sneak" ownership of the (often barely modified) uploaded work and recycle that for sale as a separate "library". AI is this, "on steroids".
Udio can term all they want. In a court of law their b.s. terms are not going to supersede federal copyright laws. They have no claims on your original intellectual property no matter what they scribble, that's why I don't worry about it. I don't mind them using my content to train their model, but if they use it any other way, in it's completed copyrighted form--if I got money, they paying me
Musicians have always taken what they have heard both consciously and subconsciously and created something from it. This is exactly what these AI programs are doing. It is a bit rich for American record companies to go after these AI companies when they have been stifling creativity for years which is why everything sounds the same....and nothing sells. It is no surprise that the biggest artists today are Adele, Taylor Swift and Ed Sheeran, all songwriters who can play the guitar and piano when writing songs. Proper music not just a great computer techie who can make Ableton work. And all of them have been brought up listening to various types of music form folk, rock, pop, r and b and it percolated in their heads and out came their own thing. This is no different from Udio.
23:15 - without going into details, what we call AI (and what should be descibed as Artificial NARROW Intelligence) can be understood as a form of a decision-making-tree.
Basically "IF you tell me X I do Y, ELSE I do Z" and this a bazillion times over for very miniscule detail - im techically being really ignorant and overly shallow when i describe it like that but this at least tells you what happens internally. If you tell it "i want dark pop" it will look at what it learned about dark pop and create a track that has the main components of a dark pop song. Now, how does that come into play when you ask "why cant it be unique?": ANI can only be as diverse as its trainingdata and it technically cant innovate, only repackage whats already been there. Similar to you throwing a bunch of dice and writing down the results, given enough time of repacking the same basic components you will at some point get an output thats virtually indistinguishable from a result you had once before that. Another Example: think of blindly mixing the Colours Yellow and Blue: there is only so many new shades of green you can create before you encounter one thats virtually indistinguishable from one that has already been there - and you can NEVER create colours that contain red.
Meta suspended my facebook page for copyright.. which the songs are mine from paid subscription to Udio.. Facebook suspended me... Should i sue Meta???
@ronaldwaynethomasjr If you need legal help with the copyright issue, please contact our legal office at admin@delgadoentertainmentlaw.com. Thank you!
@@TopMusicAttorney They reinstated my account this morning.. I gave them a warning if it happens again I will not be using there services no more... Thanks..
I’m wondering if Suno/udio lose the lawsuit what will happen to all producers who’ve used these ai tools in major placement songs or just regular ppl who make music with suno.. will they be allowed to keep royalties? And Keep songs up on commercial platforms? Will they have a clause that after the loss from hereafter no more ai music allowed on platforms and if they’re are then lawsuits would happen? Are they gonna sue millions of ppl? Because that’s kind of impossible
Its like Photoshop declaring that everything you generate with their "breakthrough" AI plugin is thelrs😮
I bought one month’s subscription to one of the music A.I. platforms and I generated a large number or songs from both original lyrics and other prompts for the purpose a building a library or an idea bucket. I then transcribe songs which I consider worthwhile or interesting and I rearrange them, alter structure, add or remove what I deem my artist liberty to do so an finally I re-record them. Question; in the case of wanting to protect my new written scores and/or recordings what proof of ownership do I need to present for copyright registration? (Bill of sale receipt?) Secondly, if American legislation prohibits copyright registration of any A.I. generated material, what legality prohibits anyone from using the material for commercial purposes and/or claiming it as their own? A quick note: I do not live in the USA.😎
Where I am in does not recognize copyright on generated content either. But we're going through times of change.
What if its instrumental? What if you then take it into proclduction software, stem it, peoduce andmix it, add some effects and then output? Is it not then YOURS?
Please join us tonight for the Livestream here at 5 pm PST! We try to answer as many questions as possible.
Everyone: activate your DMCA shields and extend it over this channel!
When you create anything on suno it has a button next to it that says "public" click it if you want the world to see it. That's when they may use your work. I never click public.
I see many users who are downloading published songs other usres and using them commercialy via DistroKid on youtube and other platforms. But what rights Udio's user have when someone downloeded his published AI song over platform and registred as own?
❤ Video excellent: please can having music on SoundCloud be a problem if it is also posted on DistroKid? I have not yet activated monetization on SoundCloud: can you clarify this point for me? I would not like to make mistakes. Many thanks
QUESTION:
If a town says it's suddenly ILLEGAL to chew gum while walking on the street, and it's NOT LEGALLY retroactive, HOW are TOS retroactive?
If I can curse on XYS and then they say you can't - HOW is it OK/Legal for them to take down stuff retroactively especially if they don't specifically state as much in the original/previous TOS, and if you don't have an option to OPT OUT (must accept to keep your previous works) or lose you're stuff/get cancelled??????
QUESTION:
What if you create a song under the FREE VERSION then go to PAID - does that exclude or include that song?
QUESTION:
I've tried with my own legal learning to figure this out when it comes to Sunno (yah I did one with Paid Version but I wrote the lyrics and input the music style with intro music and verses/chourus/etc) and am still so confused.
It actually did what I envisioned .... and am planning on publishing it regardless of it being copyrighted...
One loophole would be to add more music as an intro or outro once you are a member, then “technically” it’s a new track. You don’t even have to use the new stuff you add, you can choose to edit it down to what you want to use later.
@@ghost-user559 But does that actually work with TOS/Copyright law????
@@ReigneNation Well the catch with all ai is only human creativity can be copyrighted. Meaning you *must* use your own lyrics or you can’t claim ownership rights for anything ai music. As far as TOS, who knows, they don’t actually know what they can even enforce and none of this has ever existed before, and they have no real way to enforce anything at all yet. So it’s best to play it safe always, but who knows.
@@ghost-user559 But HOW was AI created? Via HUMANS, and if a HUMAN does some input, does that not kick in the copyright?
I'm seriously asking cuz I mad a song via AI with DAW- I wrote the lyrics/melody and though I can't play biango I did it.
@@ReigneNation Basically kind of. They already have made the rules that the ai stuff cannot be copyrighted because we did not perform it, but you can own the lyrics that you wrote. So it’s a weird situation. Basically if you do enough human stuff, you own that, even though you don’t technically have the copyright on the ai parts. Like if the ai sings it, but you write the lyrics, you own the songwriting license but not the recording itself. So if a person makes the lyrics but the ai sings it, you own the lyrics copyright but technically no one owns the ai performance, not even you. So basically we are splitting ownership with someone that doesn’t technically exist, so it’s basically still ours, but only the human parts. It’s very confusing because it’s all still new.
One last note to add to my previous comment. When on an A.I site I erase everything generated and do not publish anything on their platform for what ever it is worth.
A certain music platform with a green icon made it impossible for me to listen to my own music files unless I uploaded them. As a music engineer I do not have the relevant artist permission. I deleted the app and I had access to my files again. I am only aware of one other person noticing this.
Because they don't want you increasing the number of listens maybe?
shit😮 What about suno 😮😮 Love from Mik Roy from Denmark ❤️😘
Do ur thing mama. I love people that help People whole heartly you're going to get blessed for this for helping people fact
going by current laws, the argument could be made that nothing we create using technology can be under copyright,no book,no image,no song,being that technology is ai and ai is technology and we use technology for everything we create.
So if I write the lyrics and got Udio or Suno to create a song, do I own the copyright? I'm so confused
I don't know why they keeping the issue confused. If you wrote all the lyrics or even most, you can copyright the song. The government ruling says that an A.I. work is eligible based on the amount of human input. So if you use all A.I. lyrics, but you did the music and arranging etc;--you can copyright the song--and so on.
Not decided yet. Only purely prompt driven art was decided.
@@TeeCee-qq4ev As of now: you own the part you did. So if you only input the lyrics. you only own the lyrics. The copyright laws haven't caught up yet to include prompting as "human input". It's still being debated. But in my opinion, it should be like a photographer. He aimed the camera, and pressed the click button yet still gets a copyright on the picture that the machine created.
See what I mean? Deliberately do this ish for what? All anybody has to do is read the copyright offices's ruling on the issue
@@TeeCee-qq4ev I've put a copyright stamp and year with my name handle on my lyrics in my YT videos description, so hopefully gives me some rights..😃
Do you personally have your music in spotify? If so they have probably used it to train the AI without your consent already.
So....I am a smart guy...but not in these legal whirlpools...🤔🤔😒😒😱😱😪😪 I use SUNO, As a paying subscriber, I write ALL the lyrics and I arrange the song and I give SUNO prompts in what style, male or female singer etc etc and SUNO creates the music with my lyrics and instructions to a song. In my mind - this is my song - I upload it to ALL the streaming services, in a believe I can to this - cause....well that's how I understood it. I can do that. Have I gotten it all wrong? Do I do something I am not allowed to??? And by the way... The lawsuit from "the music industry" - that's just pathetic! They are just pissing their territory and clawing for keeping their position as a monopoly - sad and pathetic! They dont give a shit about me or any other big or small artist - they just think about the money they make! ...
The point being , If you are a "paid" subscriber you dont have to attribute , and that goes for almost all AI services ,
We Want To Know The Rules, Udio !!!! Is that too much to ask for? I wrote the lyrics, everything else is Udio --for a very good example. Well, Mr Udio spokesperson appearing on TMA ? Can I copyright the damn song? What should I include in my submission to Copyright office? Can I say distribute my song as, title: "Udio is Legit" by me? And -- do I own everything? Thanks !!!
And my above comment is crossed out because ? Just wondering
Many species of animals use music to communicate. Starlings, for example, don't get sued for copying car alarms. If this BS continues, humans are the first and only species to be prohibited to produce music.
I think the only reason to have a Udio representative on would be to grill them about the training data and watch them squirm as a form of cathartic entertainment.
What challenges, the sophistication of your understanding
Interesting part about registering machine generated works along with human works. I had a thought, do melodies released using random algorithms also count as "not human" made? A lot of DAWs and devices have random tools... no ai but not human.
Thats why the thing i make on Udio or suno i dont put it in public and make my own lyrics then I just post my music on other sites.
21:57 in the meta tags of the audio file
Q. if you write lyrics, then you sing them into your phone like you suggested (to get instant CW in normal circumstances) then you upload lyrics to udio, make song (date and time stamped CW lyrics!) is this not protected ?
I would not be able to upload lyrics to MJ Thriller and create a new song based on those lyrics for obvious reasons !
but i could if I was M jackson, and based on the terms it looks like MJ would not own full CW, looks like possibly UDIO does.
lol - very confusing as its unclear what exactly is protected/unprotected going forward? it should say in terms that "USER" 100% owns the lyrics if they wrote them.
I would think that if one was to have a major international hit or hits using A.I. material and then finds himself or herself in a law suit for copyright infringement I would think that their TERMS OF SERVICE could be refuted as abusive and predatory in a court of law. A contract between two parties, by it’s nature, implies negotiated terms! Secondly, there seem to be a huge contradiction in this whole discussion! If one is refused copyright registration by the US Government for material generated by A.I. therefor I cannot sue anybody for using the paid material or other? So why do they seem to think they are entitled to take someone to court for using their unpaid A.I. and claim damages? Could somebody explain this to me slowly like if I was a six year old child? In the case of their TERMS OF SERVICE they try impose in the public market place is not an automatic right to sue or whatever else they feel they are entitled to. I am sure that sooner or later the authorities will step in and resolve this whole mess about legalities regarding the use of A.I. and who owns what.
Or cancel by using the account settings page... you even had that highlighted. Emailing to cancel would be for the account of someone who died or otherwise can't access the account.
Edit - Not unique? Flip ten coins a bunch of times. You're eventually going to have the same ten flips as a previous attempt.
Regarding "inspiration":
I brought this up (via my other channel) before. Jonny Lang v Stevie Ray Vaughn
The kid clearly used SRV as inspiration. SRV acknowledged it and was not only impressed but was flattered as well.
JL (as a kid when he first came out) was/is very talented.
All musicians are "inspired" by others - so how does this legally work? If I find some song that "sounds" or "reminds" me of something I created (with or w/out copyright) could I possibly sue?
This is where this issue gets convoluted - with using words such as "inspiration." Regardless of it being from AI or human, isn't most everything (not just music) "inspired" from previous works (Shakespeare comes to mind)....
Would a Jury comprehend this 'technicality' issue or are they more likely to get it wrong, siding w/ big music labels etc instead of the artists?
Thing is, how does one get “inspiration?” You buy tapes, vinyls, cd’s, steam on Spotify, listen on the radio, buy concert tickets or even sheet music. The artists are still remunerated even indirectly. What does AI do? It scrapes the entirety of human recorded music for free, then releases content that directly competes with its training data by eating into the finite royalty pool.
Fair use is multi-faceted - and this AI music just simply does not adhere to all of it.
@@SC-ew2fc AI can't be copyrighted, so I'm not sure HOW it can eat into the finite royalty pool.
Suno has inaudible watermarks in their songs.. that’s how they know if you used their services .. I’m thinking Udio has the same thing going on to keep track of ppl using these apps
No actual answers then?
Nope. : Basically lie.. Or share or both . Idk lawyers ehh
I released a 18 track album on Apple Music, Spotify and iHeart Radio. I made it all in SUNO, and about to release the second LP.
For me the question is... Even if you use sth created in Udio, but you are a really small artist. And than, you take part created in Udio into your DAW and simply rearange it, change pitch, speed, etc. You add your own parts, played on different instruments, etc. Thank you have a finished track and upload it to streaming services. How are they going to find out that you used sth created in Udio, when there are so many tracks uploaded every single day! Is it possible? I really doubt that.
Interesting question..
If you generate a song by AI - and after that, you "recreate" this song: Is the song made by a human?
or - is it just a coversong of a creation of a computer - and so - it isn`t under copyright ?
Or - in theory - you make a melody - but someone can prove, that an Ai has made a melody like this before (what may be - with millions of generations every day)...
I guess things will get a little complicated by this..
Provenance has to be handed down on paper. There is even a clause about liquid ink. It's a Magna Carta thing. The other safety method is to send yourself a copy via registered mail. That stamp is irrefutable.
can I sell AI music that I created online?
Please join our next TH-cam Livestreams? Every Wednesday at 5 pm PST. We try to answer as many questions as possible.
Wow yu did it again so infomative & meticulously delicious with your expertise! Always enlightened with your content of knowledge!! Ty for making me smarter all the time!😂❤
Thanks of the support.
I am pretty familiar with DAW's, how would metadata actually work though in finding generated AI stuff ect.
apparently Rick Beato's kids can tell them by ear. There must be something recognizable. (I suspect the vocals have a certain filtered sound).
@@Toxicflu Yeah, but what if it's just an instrumental and no words at all?
@@Toxicflu How does one use METADATA to find AI generated stuff.
There is tech being developed to help tag music that contains generative AI and can even link it to specific providers (Udio, Suno. Etc). People trying to pass off music as a “human made” will probably find there stuff labelled as “AI generated” in the very near future.
@@SC-ew2fc but how does one know what's generative AI or not?
The "if you are a subscriber" thing is ambiguous and open to interpretation. What if I subscribe for 1 month, generate 400 songs and then cancel my membership... those 400 songs had been generated whilst I was a subscriber, so? Is that OK? If not, then what's the time limit? If I release one of those 3 years later, how would they know it was made during my 1 month? What if I've been a subscriber for 2 years, publish 300 songs over that period and then end my subscription, do I lose these subscriber rights to that work? If not, then someone should be able to subscribe for 1 month and rinse the platform for endless content to use for years after they end the membership