The conundrum of sound likes

[Murrmurr]

I don't think it's a matter of a copyright on the sound of a voice. Instead, it's an impersonation, and as such, you're trading in the reputation of the person being impersonated.

It is confusing. Although, as I understand it, the actual sound of a person's voice cannot be copyrighted, but any public performance or recording of one's voice is copyrighted. As we all know, a singer has a certain style, intonations, and tonality, and articulations that trademark their particular singing voice, that may be a bit different than when they are just speaking normally. So if an AI is used to imitate a singer, then it would be logical to assume the material used by the AI to replicate the sound of that singer would have come from a performance, and therefore a protected work. If that's the case, then it is a violation. That's my thoughts anyway.

So, as with a lot of contractual-type lawsuits, it comes down to 2 opposing attorneys arguing their interpretations of what the copyright will and won't permit, and either settling the complaint or asking a judge to judge.

I suppose this is why copyright fees can vary by hundreds of dollars. I wonder if some people pay into the thousands.

 

[bobcat]

Despite its "intelligence", AI is not a living being of any sort. It doesn't have any more rights under the law than my stapler has.

If I asked my AI program to make art, I could copyright it if I wanted to. I could sell it whether I had a copyright for it or not, and if I had it copyrighted I'd have a right to file a complaint if someone copied it for the purpose of selling it. The lines are not blurred on that issue.

My AI program did not create that work of art spontaneously, I prompted it. I fed it some info, and whether I used 2 or 3 words or 20 sentences, it couldn't have created that particular artwork if not for my prompts, parameters, instructions, ideas, or however you label my input.

If I just let my AI art program spit something out with zero prompts, it still has the same rights as my stapler...none. But, as it stands now, I have the right to own what it did...and I wouldn't owe it anything.

I get your point. I guess time will tell if that changes. There will probably be numbers of lawsuits and finger pointing to the software programmer, developer, manufacturer, and seller of the AI. People often misunderstand each other because what they say isn't what they meant. I imagine the same thing will happen with AI's.

 

[Murrmurr]

I get your point. I guess time will tell if that changes. There will probably be numbers of lawsuits and finger pointing to the software programmer, developer, manufacturer, and seller of the AI. People often misunderstand each other because what they say isn't what they meant. I imagine the same thing will happen with AI's.

I foresee laws requiring certain things be labeled "AI Generated", punishable with fines or even jail for people who fail to label their AI-generated product, depending on its impact on others. There will probably be misdemeanor and felony classifications based on that impact.

It's a form of fraud, really. The music industry aside, AI has the potential to fraud financial institutions, political elections, the global market and economies, etc. Our lawmakers need to get ahead of that kind of shyte. The music industry could actually help set the standards.

 

[Mr. Ed]

I am concerned about AI because I don't know where AI will lead us. Sometime soon AI will be used in a destructive manner that will force government laws and restrictions.

 

[bobcat]

I am concerned about AI because I don't know where AI will lead us. Sometime soon AI will be used in a destructive manner that will force government laws and restrictions.

Yes, pretty much every new technology that has come along from the past to the present, has been used for both good and bad. If there's a potential for power or advantage, someone will figure out a way to use it. I don't think AI will be any different. It has the promise of great things for humanity, but the darker side is there as well. Laws will definitely be needed.

 

[VaughanJB]

Our lawmakers need to get ahead of that kind of shyte. The music industry could actually help set the standards.

The law has been woefully behind the 8-ball since the formation of the internet. They haven't gotten ahead of anything as yet, so I wouldn't hold my breath here.

 

[Paco Dennis]

The law has been woefully behind the 8-ball since the formation of the internet. They haven't gotten ahead of anything as yet, so I wouldn't hold my breath here.

You got that right. Woefully is a great word. There is no way the internet watch dogs are going to stop the innovation that is happening as we speak. Voices, pictures, and video clips are being copied and manipulated in almost unbelievable ways to create new content that is mind blowing, and spectacular in some fashion to attract an audience. The field has blown open so completely that no one is safe from being exploited if a bad actor/s are involved.