Former Beatle and artists including Sam Fender, Kate Bush and Hans Zimmer record silent LP Is This What We Want
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.
I think it’s my favorite song he’s done.
Wait… This isn’t posted in The Onion?!?
Honestly, it’s better than his 90’s catalogue.
Frankly astonished he’s alive although
Actor Dick Van Dyke is due to turn 100 next month, so Paul’s got room.
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”.
‘
I won’t be listening to that.
Thanks for the chuckle this morning internet stranger.
So an album full of covers of John Cage’s 4 33.
Great message, but weird way to protest. What are the optics even?
Keep in mind, these businessmen only hate AI because it threatens their money.
so? other businessmen only like AI because it makes them money.
like it or not money is important in our society, even for artists.
How much do they need, though?
You people never factor this in. It’s always an on-off switch in your minds.
consider this. most musicians don’t have [n]early as much money as Paul McCartney. Even Paul McCartney didn’t have much money when he was starting out in the 60s.
Yeah, and they still make music.
Yeah, fuck musicians for wanting to make a living… They should all have a day job or just starve like all the greats… JFC, you people are just something…
Look into the future. They’re not just protecting themselves. They are protesting in protection of all music artists.
So an extremely small percentage of them can have excessive wealth like paul?
Hard pass.
Many, many new artist haven’t earned bupkis yet. And AI, would make it more difficult. So, zip it, dippy.
You are smart.
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.
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.
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.
Yeah. Chief keef had to do this as well in the Midwest, due to warrants. It was extremely lackluster.
Businessmen milking talented dead people for as much as possible. Exactly what it’ll be used for.
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.
you’re saying protesting the use of AI to make music is gatekeeping entry? It’s more like protecting the IP of fellow musicians. How do you think AI was trained to make music? Do you think musicians were compensated for that training?
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
deleted by creator
Did you delete a comment, or is this your comment? Because funny if so
Nah, that would be if they commented just spaces.
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.
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™ already prefers low-royalty music, and AI music will certainly have the lowest costs to play.
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.
My ideal world does not use money.
be realistic my friend.
Even in a full-communism-now utopia, the idea of compensating people for their creative endeavers and labor is still going to happen, that compensation will be indistinguishable from “money” as it is currently used.
Oh… That would be swell. First we ought to remove greed from human nature.
So how much work are you willing to do for free?
Is it that your ideal world does not use money, or you’re the only one who can get paid?
As for me, since it begs the question, I was raised on Star Trek, so I too like the idea of an ideal world where money isn’t needed. But I also have bills to pay, and I’m not ashamed to admit I would not work for free, because that would mean getting my lights and Net cut off, and losing my home. Some people do crazy things for their ideals, risking their very safety and lives. Like Greta Thunberg a month or two ago bringing humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people (or rather attempting to do that; she was caught, detained, and ridiculed by the Israelis for it). Most people wouldn’t risk it though. But it’s okay to talk about it online, but in real life? We all gotta pay the bills.
Musicians, too.
That’s that pesky capitalism mindset at work.
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.
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
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
deleted by creator
we’ll really only get music from rich people
Aren’t most successful musicians already the children of the wealthy?
No.
A ton of them did go to the same high school, which is weird.
That’s not weird at all
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.
‘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.
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:
-
Its music will be 100% derivative with no true creativity at all. Do you just want a mishmash of all pre-existing music forever?
-
most importantly, the artists whose music the genAI was trained on were likely not compensated at all for that training. So not only is the music ecosystem going to be inundated with AI slop, but we’ve stolen from working musicians to do it.
-
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.
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.
But what about live performances?
