Schall und Stille

I encourage every fediverse #artist who distributes their work under a #creativecommons license to chime in on this topic.

https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-signals/discussions/21

#music #ccmusic #noa #ai #freemusic #art #musicians #musician #arts #culture

Please boost. 

(edit: exchanged the issue link with a link to the Creative Commons discussion page)

This is all so *very* wrong. · creativecommons cc-signals · Discussion #21

(copied from #14) Problem This whole idea is completely and utterly wrong. Description Inviting AI scrapers to negotiate licensing terms for CC works is like a flock of sheep holding a summit to dr...

GitHub
Jun 26 at 5:20amWeb
Show threadHiisikoloartJun 26
@stephan
Generative AI and people who support it should be thrown into mariana trench and forgotten.
Show threadEventOrgJun 26

@stephan

@guido_kuehn ⬆️

Show threadMomoJun 26
@stephan
Last week in Karlsruhe on the GPN I was in a talk about AI companies and CC licensed content. After the talk two guys and I stand outside of the conference room with the presenter and we talked. And consent was "Companies shit on licenses. So CC-BY-NC for example doesn't matter to them, they take until they are stopped. So I think at this point we decide if CC licenses are worth something or if others can just take our music and put it on bandcamp as their own because nothing happened to the AI guys, so what should happen to them?
Show threadSloymentJul 5
@momo @stephan
If someone copies, distributes or performs your work without obeying to the terms of your license, it is copyright infringement. Your work is still protected by copyright, and nothing but your license allows them to copy, distribute or perform your work. This means, you can sue them. If you don’t wanna sue them, switch to Creative Commons Zero, and stop complaining.
Show threadSloymentJul 5

@stephan
The whole CC Signals stuff reads like someone trying to create new CC licenses while not understanding how licenses work. AIs don’t need a license because neither do they copy nor distribute nor perform a protected work. Instead, they analyze works in order to create a model that can be used to create new works. This is completely legal usage of any copyrighted work, no license needed.

I fully disagree with all the rant against AI. Instead, I have embraced AI to let it create music, which I then put under Creative Commons Zero.

What we need is AI models under free licenses, that can run locally.

Show threadMomoJul 5

@Sloyment@social.tchncs.de
That's wrong. Companies take content and use them in their work processes. The result is an LLM model trained in something. By taking my work and using it to derrive something from it, they have to attribute me and release their work (=their LLM) in the same license.

It's the same as taking music and giving it to my kid to analyze (=listening to it) to be a better drummer. I bet Sony Music would never tell me I need no license for that as well.

I'm not interested in any further interaction, but I will not let bullshit stay in this conversation without an objection. And this is why I reply and block here.
@stephan