AI Copyright Claimed My Last Video | Venus Theory

Boycott music-generating AI services. Just don’t use them. Absolutely unnecessary. Furthermore, this issue proves that there isn’t and has never been any “originality” whatsoever in music and the arts in general, all the more in the AI era. Everything is sampled, copied, adapted, transformed from something else. In visual as well as musical creations. When you prompt a cute cartoonish illustration on an AI platform, it is composed bit by bit from millions of pre-existing cartoonish illustrations just like that. In music it’s the same. AI don’t go to a studio to record each and every instrument all anew.

Now, that really sucks. If I write more music in the future I could be infringing on my own copyright of their maybe copyright because I wrote music that sounded too much like… me.

The question of who holds copyright over AI-generated music is currently a legal gray area and varies by jurisdiction. In some cases, especially when the user actively inputs prompts, chooses specific styles, or makes other creative choices, the user may be considered to have contributed enough creative input to claim copyright. Some platforms explicitly grant copyright to the user, as they aim to incentivize use by assuring users they own their creations.

If Suno AI restricts you from using your creations outside of their platform or imposes high licensing fees, this limits one’s creative freedom. Today we’re going to look at what may be the newest nightmare in this late-stage big tech hellscape we call the music industry.

Certain AI music platforms retain rights to the output created by their AI. This often depends on the platform’s terms of service, which may state that the company retains ownership of any music generated on their platform or that they grant a license to the user rather than full ownership. This is more common with platforms that offer their music generation tools as a service or intend to retain control over how the music can be distributed.

Generally, the developers or programmers who built the AI do not retain copyright to each output generated by their algorithms, as they typically don’t have direct creative input on each specific piece produced. Their work is more accurately classified as creating the software itself, which is covered by intellectual property rights for software but not necessarily the outputs of that software.

No Copyright at All (Public Domain): In some jurisdictions, particularly in the United States, purely AI-generated works without human input or minimal human involvement may not qualify for copyright protection. The U.S. Copyright Office, for example, has taken the position that only works created with human authorship are eligible for copyright, which could mean that some AI-generated music falls into the public domain if it lacks sufficient human authorship.