, , , , ,

U.S. Copyright Office’s AI Guidance Sparks More Questions Than Answers for Music (Guest Column)

To clear up questions about the copyrightability of AI in music, the U.S. Copyright Office (USCO) recently signaled that copyrighting songs is about to get a lot more complicated.

Last week the USCO released guidance on the copyright-ability of works made using AI, saying that a work that is a combination of both AI generation and human creation can be eligible for copyright protection, with any purely AI made portions carved out. Essentially, it takes the position that copyright only extends to the portions of the work that are attributable to human authorship.

Related

This sounds logical however often such clear boundaries do not exist in music. The USCO acknowledges this by leaving space for copyrighting AI-generated content if it gave form to an author’s “original mental conception,” as opposed to being a purely “mechanical reproduction.”

Giving form to an idea is something songwriters are familiar with. Whether for writer’s block, inspiration, or organization, many if not most current creators use some form of AI tools to a certain extent, and how that informs their process often is not clearly defined.

To address this, the policy caveat is that the copyrightability of any given work will depend on its specific circumstances and will need to be determined on a case-by-case basis. It’s worth noting copyright does not protect ideas, only expression, and these distinctions will no doubt be complex when addressed in practice. Specifically, it states,

“This policy does not mean that technological tools cannot be part of the creative process. Authors have long used such tools to create their works or to recast, transform, or adapt their expressive authorship. For example, a visual artist who uses Adobe Photoshop to edit an image remains the author of the modified image, and a musical artist may use effects such as guitar pedals when creating a sound recording. In each case, what matters is the extent to which the human had creative control over the work’s expression and ‘‘actually formed’’ the traditional elements of authorship.”

The USCO has been engaging with the relevant parties on this topic for some time, and there is great pressure to chart the path on AI as platforms become increasing advanced. Across the art world, AI is already pushing boundaries.

This most recent policy guidance also likely was prompted by a pending lawsuit on the question of whether any human authorship is required for copyrightability. The case was brought against the Copyright Office by an AI developer whose registration for a visual work of art was rejected since he listed AI as the author.

Related

The lawsuit argues that the Copyright Act does not require human authorship. While it is true that the Copyright Act does not explicitly include the word human authorship and instead refers to “original works of authorship,” the Copyright Office’s decision not to grant the copyright is bolstered by decades of caselaw that interpret “author” to mean “human.” A few years ago a selfie taken by a monkey was deemed ineligible for copyright protection on the basis that the monkey was not a human author.

The USCO has authority to prescribe application requirements and to “establish regulations not inconsistent with law for the administration of the functions and duties made the responsibility of the Register.” (17 U.S.C. 702). However, the Copyright Office will be subject to the courts ruling on this case.

As far as the current rule limiting copyrightability to human expression goes, the exact amount of human involvement necessary to merit copyright protection in a work created using AI remains to be seen. This untested line raises significant questions for the music industry and the foreseeable future of AI-assisted songwriting.

The primary example we have from the Copyright Office is fairly straightforward, however it is not a song. An author submitted an application for registration of a comic book where the text was written by the human author but the images were generated by AI, through a tool called Midjourney.

The Copyright Office determined that while the work was copyrightable, the copyright only extended to the human-authored text, and to the human authorship involved in the selection and arrangement of the images but did not extend to the AI-generated images themselves.

Related

Clearly a comic book allows for easy differentiation between images and text. That may be analogous to, for example, a melody created purely by AI combined with lyrics created purely by a human or vice versa. In cases like this, foreseeable questions would arise around remixing and sampling—is it fair game to remix and sample portions of a song that were created by AI and excluded from copyright protection?

While it’s easier to discern how the Copyright Office will rule on some hypotheticals, it’s extremely unclear how these lines will be drawn when the human and AI contributions are more intertwined.

AI is often used as a collaborative partner in the creative process. For example, a human songwriter might use an AI tool to generate a midi file containing a few bars of melody, or a text-generator to suggest few stanzas of lyrics, and then substantially edit and revise the AI-generated content and combine it with entirely original lines and melodies from their own imagination.

In that situation, it is unclear how the Copyright Office would begin to distinguish between the human authorship and AI authorship involved. At what point, if any, of editing and changing lyrics generated by AI would they become lyrics generated by a person? What determines significant enough change to be considered original? How will registrars investigate these questions when reviewing a copyright application? The USCO advises,

“applicants have a duty to disclose the inclusion of AI-generated content in a work submitted for registration and to provide a brief explanation of the human author’s contributions to the work. As contemplated by the Copyright Act, such disclosures are ‘‘information regarded by the Register of Copyrights as bearing upon the preparation or identification of the work or the existence, ownership, or duration of the copyright.’”

It’s clear how copyright registration could immediately become more complicated and time consuming with these new considerations. One must question whether the USCO has the manpower and resources to take on what is in some ways an entirely new evaluation process for any registrations involving AI.

And aside from registration, these big questions will shape future licensing practices—is a license for a work that is only partially copyrightable worth the same as a license for a fully copyrighted work? What about a work that doesn’t have enough human contribution and doesn’t receive copyright protection—is it free to use, or stream? How will this affect royalty administration?

Beyond the ability to differentiate what is AI and what is human created, there are even larger questions looming around this space. AI works by continually ingesting, or copying, works across the Internet to “teach” its platform to create. To what extent does ingestion need to be generally licensed?

Whether they like it or not, the work of human creators is essentially “training” the computer programs trying to replace them, or some would argue, assist them. AI will continue to be integrated into the creative process, and in an era where the value of human-created music continues to be challenged, it is crucial that the music industry decides how to approach these issues in a way that ultimately ensures the long-term value and quality of human-made songs. After all, there would be no AI generated music without them.

David Israelite is the President & CEO of the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA). NMPA is the trade association representing American music publishers and their songwriting partners.

https://www.billboard.com/pro/copyright-office-ai-guidance-questions-david-israelite-guest-column/


December 2024
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

About Us

Welcome to encircle News! We are a cutting-edge technology news company that is dedicated to bringing you the latest and greatest in everything tech. From automobiles to drones, software to hardware, we’ve got you covered.

At encircle News, we believe that technology is more than just a tool, it’s a way of life. And we’re here to help you stay on top of all the latest trends and developments in this ever-evolving field. We know that technology is constantly changing, and that can be overwhelming, but we’re here to make it easy for you to keep up.

We’re a team of tech enthusiasts who are passionate about everything tech and love to share our knowledge with others. We believe that technology should be accessible to everyone, and we’re here to make sure it is. Our mission is to provide you with fun, engaging, and informative content that helps you to understand and embrace the latest technologies.

From the newest cars on the road to the latest drones taking to the skies, we’ve got you covered. We also dive deep into the world of software and hardware, bringing you the latest updates on everything from operating systems to processors.

So whether you’re a tech enthusiast, a business professional, or just someone who wants to stay up-to-date on the latest advancements in technology, encircle News is the place for you. Join us on this exciting journey and be a part of shaping the future.

Podcasts

TWiT 1011: The Year in Review – A Look at the Top Stories of 2024 This Week in Tech (Audio)

What's behind the tech industry's mass layoffs in 2024? : NPR Rabbit R1 AI Assistant: Price, Specs, Release Date | WIRED Stealing everything you've ever typed or viewed on your own Windows PC is now possible with two lines of code — inside the Copilot+ Recall disaster. Microsoft delays Recall after security concerns, and asks Windows Insiders for help The Qualcomm Snapdragon X Architecture Deep Dive: Getting To Know Oryon and Adreno X1 Elon Musk: First Human Receives Neuralink Brain Chip Apple hit with €1.8bn fine for breaking EU law over music streaming Bluesky emerges The hidden high cost of return-to-office mandates Apple's Car Was Doomed by Its Lofty Ambitions to Outdo Tesla SpaceX pulls off unprecedented feat, grabs descending rocket with mechanical arms U.S. versus Apple: A first reaction Google Says It Won't Force Gemini on Partners in Antitrust Remedy Proposal U.S. Accuses Chinese Hackers of Targeting Critical Infrastructure in America U.S. Agency Warns Employees About Phone Use Amid Ongoing China Hack AT&T says criminals stole phone records of 'nearly all' customers in new data breach National Public Data confirms breach exposing Social Security numbers Schools Want to Ban Phones. Parents Say No. New York passes legislation that would ban 'addictive' social media algorithms for kids GPT-4o (omni) + new "Her"-style AI assistant (it's nuts) Google emissions jump nearly 50% over five years as AI use surges Trump proposes strategic national crypto stockpile at Bitcoin Conference Ten additional US states join DOJ antitrust lawsuit looking to break up Live Nation and TicketmasterThe Internet Archive just lost its appeal over ebook lending Hezbollah Pagers Explode in Apparent Attack Across Lebanon OpenAI raises $6.6 billion in largest VC round ever Painting by A.I.-Powered Robot Sells for $1.1 Million Netflix's Live Mike Tyson Vs. Jake Paul Fight Battling Sound & Streaming Glitches In Lead-Up To Main Event Infowars Sale to The Onion Rejected by Federal Bankruptcy Judge Supreme Court agrees to hear challenge to TikTok ban So You Want to Solve the NJ Drone Mystery? Our Expert Has Some Ideas Beeper's push for iMessage on Android is really over The Quiet Death of Ello's Big Dreams Japan finally ends mandatory form submission on floppy disks We'll Miss You: Pioneering instant messaging program ICQ is finally shutting down after nearly 30 years Spotify is going to break every Car Thing gadget it ever sold Game Informer to Shut Down After 33 Years In Memoriam Host: Leo Laporte Guests: Fr. Robert Ballecer, SJ, Richard Campbell, and Mikah Sargent Download or subscribe to This Week in Tech at https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-tech Get episodes ad-free with Club TWiT at https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsor: bitwarden.com/twit
  1. TWiT 1011: The Year in Review – A Look at the Top Stories of 2024
  2. TWiT 1010: The Densest State in the US – TikTok Ban, Drones Over Jersey, GM Quits Robotaxis
  3. TWiT 1009: Andy Giveth & Bill Taketh Away – Trump's Tech Titans, Crypto Boom, TikTok's US Ban, Intel CEO Exits
  4. TWiT 1008: Internet Legal – Australia's Social Media Ban for Kids, Smart Home Nightmare, Bluesky's Ascent
  5. TWiT 1007: All the Hotdogs in the World – China's "Salt Typhoon" Hack, Google on the Chopping Block, Recall AI