Montese Jordan, MBA’s Post

The music industry welcomed the passing of the European Union’s AI Act earlier this year, although recently creative-industry bodies have been pressing for the new legislation to get a “meaningful implementation” across the EU. Today we’ve got a better idea of what that implementation might look like, thanks to the release of a first draft of a ‘General-Purpose AI Code of Practice’ this week. It’s the first of four planned drafting rounds, and focuses on general-purpose AI models – those which perform multiple tasks. So be warned that it’s far from final – not least because “nearly 1,000 stakeholders” are going to be having their say on it next week alone. Still, it’s interesting, because there’s quite a lot on AI models and copyright in it. Not least the clause early on where companies signing the code of practice agree to recognise “that any use of copyright protected content requires the authorisation of the rightsholder(s) concerned unless relevant copyright exceptions and limitations apply” Read more of our analysis here: https://lnkd.in/d6JtUNkV #musically #musicnews #readmore

A big thanks to Music Ally for the opportunity to contribute to this important discussion on the fight against modern audio piracy 🚨 Virginie Berger, Chief Business Development and Rights Officer at MatchTune, shares insights in the guest article on how the rise of piracy is impacting creators—and how MatchTune's CoverNet is leading the charge in identifying and tackling these infringements. With the rise of AI-generated music, vocal deepfakes, altered audio and more, protecting artists’ rights has never been more critical. CoverNet helps to tackle these infringements head-on, allowing creators to maintain control over their work and focus on what they do best—creating amazing music. Read the full article: https://lnkd.in/e5wBTkck #MusicTech #CopyrightProtection #AI #CoverNet #MusicIndustry

Another important draft law in America to tackle copyright infringement by AI companies. https://lnkd.in/eh-WvW3S "We strongly support the bill which prioritizes creators who continue to be exploited by unjust AI practices.” David Israelite President & CEO of 🇺🇸 group National Music Publishers' Association. There's no legal or moral excuse for AI or Big Tech companies accessing, training or generating #AI using digital music without permission. Doing so is simply ripping off artists & creators. Between the TRAIN Act & the COPIED Act, there is alignment with the infringement prevention & training transparency measures agreed in the EU AI Act - which gives clarity internationally. And as the many recent music industry deals by our member companies have demonstrated, legal #GenAI & #AI training is perfectly possible & there to be done. #ArtificialIntelligence #RealRights 🌎🎶

In a groundbreaking legal move, Sony Music, Warner Music, and Universal Music Group (UMG) are suing AI startups Suno AI and Uncharted Labs Inc. (Udio AI) for $350M, alleging unauthorized use of copyrighted songs in AI training (https://lnkd.in/e3eUgCMr). This case centres on claims that Suno's AI-generated tracks bear striking similarities to hits by artists like Eminem, Ed Sheeran, and ABBA, raising serious questions about copyright and AI. This lawsuit could set a vital precedent in the evolving intersection of AI and copyright law. Will the federal court find the AI generated content “transformative” for fair use defence or is the secondary use of AI generated content for a substantially similar commercial purpose to the original works as held by the US Supreme Court in Andy Warhol v. Goldsmith? Do these AI generative tools threaten to eliminate the existing market for licensing sound recordings? In a parallel to the film and TV industries, who are fighting their own battles with the implications of AI (recently: https://lnkd.in/eGtXJUqV), this case brings to mind issues such as the use of AI to generate ‘Deepfakes’, recreate actors' likenesses or generate scripts and the industries’ struggles combatting rapid growth of AI in the creative space. This case could similarly influence future legal battles over AI-generated film and TV content, reinforcing the necessity for clear regulations, protections, and ethical practices in AI development. As AI continues to revolutionize industries, it's crucial for developers to respect artists' rights and ensure fair compensation. #IntellectualProperty #AI #MusicIndustry #CopyrightLaw #Innovation #LegalTech #AIethics #CreativeRights #FilmandTV #Entertainment #EntertainmentLaw #Deepfakes #AIGenerativeTools

#Music Industry vs #AI ⚖️ The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence has sparked numerous debates about its implications for Intellectual property rights. In a landmark case, #Universal Music Group (UMG), #Concord Music Group, and ABKCO have taken a significant step forward in their #legal battle against AI company #Anthropic. Policymakers may need to consider new frameworks that balance #innovation with the protection of #creative rights. Although, Universal Music Group's (UMG) aggressive stance against AI-generated music is primarily driven by #business interests rather than a pure concern for #artists' #rights. In fact, UMG is collaborating with #Google to develop tools for creating AI tracks using artists' likenesses legally. 🤷🏻♂️ Read the full #Article by Vinyl Culture 📚🔗:

An important precedent may be set here (if it progresses to a hearing) with the main issue revolving around Suno and Udio using copyrighted music to train their AI models without obtaining proper licenses or compensating the artists/rightsholders. The infringement claim is seemingly pretty clear-cut but with AI not going anywhere, let's not go down the Napster path and seek to litigate against what may well be a future revenue stream. Hopefully it can be a more proactive approach in looking at how a licensing (and appropriate compensation) regime can be agreed upon between rightsholders and AI companies

The next stage of conflict between legacy content owners and upstart generative AI companies began yesterday. In this case the owners of rights to "human musical expression" -- major record labels representing the thousands of musicians and millions of songs -- sued two genAI companies for alleged copyright violations, asserting these companies used copyrighted material without consent to train their AI models, resulting in the unauthorized reproduction of songs. I find genAI-music to be obviously not human and a little off-putting, but it is here to stay; more to come on this subject. https://lnkd.in/dkX7wFnM

The AI Transparency Act: Who’s Training Who? Should AI developers be required to disclose the materials used to train their models? The music industry thinks so. Backing the proposed TRAIN Act, they’re pushing for transparency to protect creators’ rights and ensure fair use of their work. #AI #Copyright #Transparency #Legaltech

Lawsuit Against AI Firms - A Potential Game-Changer for the AI Industry? In a landmark move, Universal Music Group, Sony Music, and Warner Records have filed lawsuits against AI music-synthesis companies Udio and Suno for massive copyright infringement. The lawsuits, brought before federal courts in New York and Massachusetts, allege that these AI firms used copyrighted recordings to train their models without permission. The record labels are seeking statutory damages of up to $150,000 per song used in training, a figure that could lead to significant financial repercussions for the AI companies. The core of the complaint revolves around the use of copyrighted materials to train AI models, which can generate new music based on textual descriptions. This practice, according to the plaintiffs, devalues the original works and poses a direct threat to the livelihoods of human artists. Specific examples cited in the lawsuit include AI-generated songs that mimic elements from famous tracks. This case marks the first major legal challenge against AI-generated music and underscores a growing concern within the industry. Previously, Sony Music sent warning letters to over 700 AI firms and streaming services, prohibiting the use of its music for AI training. Additionally, over 200 artists have voiced their opposition to the use of AI in music creation, fearing it undermines their rights and efforts. The outcome of this lawsuit could set a precedent for the future of AI in creative industries. If the court mandates compulsory licenses for AI training data, it could make AI development financially unfeasible for smaller startups, potentially consolidating power within the hands of major labels. Key Takeaways: - Massive Copyright Infringement Claims AI firms Udio and Suno face significant legal challenges and potential damages. - Industry Impact The case could reshape how AI models are trained and used in the music industry. - Future of AI in Music The lawsuit could lead to stricter regulations, possibly limiting AI music generation to well-funded entities. As a CXO why should you care? As AI continues to transform industries, leaders must stay informed about legal and ethical implications. This case highlights the importance of balancing innovation with respect for intellectual property. This landmark case underscores how Silicon Valley's Big Tech continues to disrupt traditional industries by leveraging AI, raising significant concerns about intellectual property and the economic impact on creative professionals. #MusicIndustry #CopyrightLaw #AI #DigitalTransformation #Innovation https://lnkd.in/g2z9myns

First Impressions - Legal Considerations for AI Training Models and Copyright Infringement Warner Music Group's recent move to require explicit permission for AI training using their content highlights a crucial issue in copyright law. This decision, influenced by EU regulations, raises several legal considerations: ✅ Reproduction Rights: AI training often involves copying copyrighted material, potentially infringing these rights. Significant copying strengthens the infringement argument. ✅ Fair Use: This defense hinges on whether the use is transformative and socially beneficial. Courts assess purpose, nature, amount, and market impact. Non-commercial uses favor fair use, while commercial uses face stricter scrutiny. ✅ Commercial Use: AI models developed for profit or impacting the market for the original work are less likely to be fair use. Seems to me Warner's stance might stifle AI innovation in the US, reflecting a tension between protecting creators and fostering technological advancement. Understanding these nuances is crucial for navigating AI and copyright law intersections. #CopyrightLaw #AIInnovation #ReproductionRights #FairUse #CommercialUse #WarnerMusic #AIDevelopment #LegalTech #IntellectualProperty #AIandCopyright #TechLaw #MarketImpact #DigitalRights #IPLAW https://lnkd.in/gpgAthuw