this post was submitted on 10 May 2025
916 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

69910 readers
2251 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
916
Paul McCartney and Dua Lipa urge UK Prime Minister to rethink his AI copyright plans. A new law could soon allow AI companies to use copyrighted material without permission. (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by dwazou@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world
278 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ferrule@sh.itjust.works -1 points 20 hours ago

That sounds like a setup to only go after those you can make money from and not actually protecting IP.

By definition if your song is a hit it is heard by everyone. How do we show my new song is a direct consequence of hearing X song while your new song isn't due to you hearing X song?

I can see an easy lawsuit by putting out a song and then claiming that anyone who heard it "learned" how to play their new album this way. The fact AI can output something that sounds different than any individual song it learned from means we can claim nearly all works derivative.