Paul McCartney joins music industry protest against AI with silent track
Paul McCartney joins music industry protest against AI with silent track
Former Beatle and artists including Sam Fender, Kate Bush and Hans Zimmer record silent LP Is This What We Want
I won't be listening to that.
Thanks for the chuckle this morning internet stranger.
so any silence in youtube videos is now a copyright violation.
Now that's a court case I'd actually watch closely. Sooner or later they'll run out of things to squeeze money from, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone eventually tried this.
Someone is gonna time how long she pours and try to copyright it
Especially if it lasts 4 minutes 33.
I think it's my favorite song he's done.
Honestly, it’s better than his 90’s catalogue.
Don't most artists, except a few already wealthy ones like Paul, make basically nothing on record sales and streaming?
AI can't do live performances, yet.
I was watching the new David Attenborough show here in the UK Kingdom and I realised that all the orchestral work that is done to align with moments on screen will probably be AI soon. The tech is defo there already and it’s an easy way to cut budget. A shame.
I watched Jurassic Park with a live orchestra playing all the music and it was rad
AI can pump out at least hundreds of song a day. They don't have to make much money per track when they can drown out everything else with sheer numbers.
Live bands are capped by how much they have to give the venue and ticket master. It's getting to the point where real bands will need to pledge themselves to a wealthy sponsor to continue to make a living.
There's been attempts for AI-like performances, just infantile starts. Like the one time there was a Tupac concert and it was just a digitized version of himself. That's probably what the future entails, but AI looking to improve it.
Businessmen milking talented dead people for as much as possible. Exactly what it’ll be used for.
Yeah. Chief keef had to do this as well in the Midwest, due to warrants. It was extremely lackluster.
I have to admit I get frustrated of the wealthier artists who started their careers singing of revolution and peace, yet gatekeep entry to the business and don’t speak up against the stuff that’s happening in the world. They just sit in glass houses.
Wait... This isn't posted in The Onion?!?
WTF, Paul McCartney want's to pay him royalty's for the silence?
Worked for Simon & Garfunkel's The Sound of Silence - so well that Disturbed covered it about a decade ago.
Yes exactly, Paul McCartney want is to pay him royalty is for the silence, as a form of protest against Spotify paying out "AI artists".
‘
Frankly astonished he’s alive although
Actor Dick Van Dyke is due to turn 100 next month, so Paul's got room.
Dick was sexier and less dour
Boards of canada did this on the last track of Geogaddi so that the total runtime of the album was 66:66 😎
Orange
Great message, but weird way to protest. What are the optics even?
Soundgarden did that already on their debut album Ultramega OK at 1988
Keep in mind, these businessmen only hate AI because it threatens their money.
This.
Honestly, I'd rather not have copyright at all. The problem is not that copyright law doesn't apply, it's that a particular kind of wealthy businessmen are shifting our policies to fit their needs.
It suggests that if AI companies unfairly exploit musicians’ intellectual property to train their generative AI models, the creative ecosystem will be wrecked and original music silenced.
I kind of disagree with this.
There may be less people making music when money is their main motivator. But there will still be people making music.
Maybe we will lose low effort artists but gain great music by passionate people.
I’m not a musician, but these protests are going to be completely ineffective.
Maybe we will lose low effort artists but gain great music by passionate people.
This is such a bizarre take.
I wouldn't characterize musicians who depend on some financial return as "low effort" at all. Almost all the best musicians, going back to classical music and beyond, were dependent on their music as a source of income.
If anything, the people who do music as a side hobby are usually more "low effort" than those who actually make it their main career. And if artists can't make money of their music anymore, we'll really only get music from rich people who can afford the lessons, instruments, recording studio, production, etc. as an expensive hobby rather than a source of income.
And if artists can't make money of their music anymore, we'll really only get music from rich people who can afford the lessons, instruments, recording studio, production, etc. as an expensive hobby rather than a source of income.
Ding ding ding
When discussing things like this, i find it best to view it through the lens of ubi. AI is happening, theres no amount of online debating thats going to change that. So if you dont create an economic system where people dont have to work to survive, people arent going to survive in your system. Hence, they have a point. People that WANT to get into music always have that option, untied to economic success. People that only make music as a cash grab now no longer have that incentive, because they dont need to.
People having to work to survive is barbaric
we’ll really only get music from rich people
Aren't most successful musicians already the children of the wealthy?
I think what it's saying is that if AI is what starts making money, the music industry will exploit the hell out of that.
Imagine making millions of dollars, from a band that doesn't exist, that you created, that you keep all money from their sales.
What would be your motivator to pay human artists? Why sign any?
It's more than that. genAI can't create music out of the ether. It has to be trained first, meaning it basically "listens" to a shit ton of music before it can generate any music. That means:
What would be your motivator to pay human artists? Why sign any?
I mean, the internet has given artists a way to spread their works and profit off them without any major record labels. So what artists will lose by that are exploitative companies whose only benefit is that your music will be sold by major retailers as physical CDs or Downloads.
Wouldn't put it past them to try.
The recording industry loves making money off of artists who are long dead. Reminds me of that opening to Ministry's Ghouldiggers, where the singer is talking about how some artists are being sold off in pieces. Kurt Cobain. Janis Joplin. So many more.
I'm not a musician, but
Exactly.
Yes, when you are not trying from time to time to make something - digital art, music, software, - you might feel as if this opinion were valid.
When you are trying, eventually you gain understanding. Specifically that you have far more time to do what you want if you get paid for that.
Though I haven't ever sold an intellectual work. Using my vacations and weekends for these things. But I perfectly understand people who are, eh, trying to do more than toying around once half a year.
So you are telling me that in your ideal world only people that excel in their field should be compensated?
While also telling that musicians should make music just for the pure joy of it and not for living?
Bear in mind that most stars had a lowly start, by replacing entry level jobs with AI you will likely destroy a lot of potential.
‘Oh it’s ok, they’ll still do it for the of it despite being poor, I’ll still get my music.’
This sums up modern society so well. I don’t even think it’s ill intentioned, just that the Epstein class has convinced us that individualism is ok. Conveniently.
Maybe we will lose low effort artists but gain great music by passionate people.
You'll never be able to find it or hear it though. The barrier to entry for AI music is so low, even lower then the "low-effort" artist you are deriding, that typical streaming sites will be inundated by it and nothing else will be found. The algorithm(tm) already prefers low-royalty music, and AI music will certainly have the lowest costs to play.
So an album full of covers of John Cage's 4 33.