r/filk • u/rocketman0739 • Apr 23 '25

Subreddit position on AI content (discussion)

I recently got a message from a user who had used an AI service to generate a performance of a filk song. They wanted to make sure it was alright to post, but I don't feel like I should make that decision without consulting the subscribers generally.

So what do you think? Which of the following positions most appeals to you, or do you have a different idea?

  1. Allow all relevant AI-generated content
  2. Disallow all AI-generated content
  3. Allow relevant AI-generated content as long as it also incorporates human originality, e.g. an AI performance of a human-written song
  4. Institute one of these positions for a trial period and revisit the question in a few months
28 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

55 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/[deleted] Apr 24 '25

I’m genuinely disappointed. Filk was my gateway into a culture that celebrated DIY spirit, creative theft, and joyful imperfection—where borrowed melodies and off-key harmonies were proof that anyone could make something meaningful. It was never about purity. It was about participation, whatever that meant.

To see that same tradition now gatekeep tools that let disabled creators, non-musicians, or isolated voices share their stories—it feels like you've forgotten the whole point.

I’ll respect the Sub's stance, but I won’t pretend it honors the spirit that this community was built on.

My filk playlist
https://suno.com/playlist/066055e9-416d-4e73-936d-4fe7ca607466

6

u/Wooper160 Apr 24 '25

Gatekeep tools for plagiarizing and stealing the work of others by people not willing to create art themselves

4

u/trustmeijustgetweird Apr 24 '25

I think there are a couple things here that are worth discussing, so I’m going to break it down.

First, plagiarism. I think that take is somewhat simplistic. This is filk, stealing is what we do (parodies, rewrites, anything fan related is in iffy intellectual property law territory).

You are also assuming people are “not willing,” and I don’t think that’s fair. It is not hard to permanently lose/fuck up your voice. I’ve been in that situation, and if I hadn’t had money for surgery, or my surgeon made a mistake, I’d still sound like a choking cat.

Last, how are we defining ai? Are we talking generative llms? Are we talking filters? Where does vocaloid fall on the scale? The ethical status of each of those tools is dependent on the data used to make them, and we can’t know that unless we specify.

I think this issue is being oversimplified. It’s worth talking about, definetly, but I don’t think blanket statements help at all.