Alison CreeksideJan 8, 2024
Pillaged from BlueSky:
"20 years ago we were suing teenagers for millions of dollars because they were torrenting a single Metallica album and now billionaires are demanding the free right to every work in history, so that they can re-sell it.
The law only ever serves capital."
Show threadThe Penguin of EvilJan 30, 2024

@AlisonCreekside And 20 years ago a million kids listened to Metallica, learned to play Enter Sandman badly and went and wrote their own stuff in time legally.

The real questions are not about using it, but then copying it and what degree of influence is copying. "AI" reading/listening to content is good, it's the same law and rights that lets you read content, lets search engines and screen readers work.

When it starts sharing, redistributing stuff well beyond "influenced by" it's a problem

Show threadDamian YerrickJan 30, 2024
@etchedpixels @AlisonCreekside The hard part for a songwriter is figuring out whether they went "well beyond influenced by." See, for example, George Harrison's accidental plagiarism of Ronald Mack's "He's So Fine" into "My Sweet Lord", resulting in a million-dollar judgment against Harrison. Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music.
Show threadThe Penguin of Evil

@PinoBatch @AlisonCreekside And probably even harder for an algorithm.

This is one thing that I think a lot of people do not understand. There is an enormous amount of caselaw on what is and isn't derivative and is nor isn't copying. None of that caselaw is likely to be invalidated or changed just because someone had a computer do it for them.

Jan 30, 2024 at 4:25pmWeb