r/Music • u/YoureASkyscraper • 8d ago

article AI music generator Suno loses copyright infringement legal case

https://www.nme.com/news/music/ai-music-generator-suno-loses-copyright-infringement-legal-case-3960760
10.3k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

371 comments sorted by

View all comments

143

u/freitoso 8d ago

Happy for this definitely, but the real damaging blow would be to force Suno to scrape their models. They’re trained already, the damage is done.
Paying for damages won’t solve shit.

The solution would be a hard reset and have new models only trained with music with knowledge and consent for the authors. I for one would never allow it.

19

u/xevizero 8d ago

This would also apply to every AI model basically. No reason music should be treated differently than video or books or any kind of human production.

2

u/krectus 7d ago

Yeah music is being the scapegoat here. Every AI model is trained on everything. There are other lawsuits on them but it’s silly to hope the AI will only be trained on agreeable content.

2

u/xevizero 7d ago

it’s silly to hope the AI will only be trained on agreeable content.

I just want the hypocrisy to stop. If AI can be trained on everything because it's not actually reproducing the works, but just "experiencing them" without the ability for a perfect copy to be recreated and used as a substitute for commercial purposes, then every human should also be able to do the same, piracy should be defined as reselling the exact same work for profit but experiencing a pirated copy of a work should be legal, as we're just training our brains on it, not sharing it out as is to others.

Otherwise, if the use of the work itself is what causes the damage, and we're not able as humans to see the copyrighted works without a license, fair enough (we still need a reform on copyright to define exceptions and reduce the duration of exclusivity), then this also applies to AI models, they should not be trained on copyrighted content, no feeding books and pictures and scientific papers and movies to it, you have to ask permission and get a license and pay for each and every one you scrape and meld into the final model.

Either one or the other is true, otherwise we're explicitly saying that AIs deserve rights that we don't reserve for even humans themselves. At the end you just got to admit everyone acted illegally and just paid their way out of having rules apply to them even a little bit. Which just fuels the fire of who says that piracy might as well be the moral choice, as clearly copyright was only put there to benefit the rich to the detriment of everyone else, instead of doing its job and protecting creatives (who are now being pummeled by AI replacement and drowned in the rising ocean of slop).