Machine Learning

1 readers

1 users here now

Community Rules:

Be nice. No offensive behavior, insults or attacks: we encourage a diverse community in which members feel safe and have a voice.
Make your post clear and comprehensive: posts that lack insight or effort will be removed. (ex: questions which are easily googled)
Beginner or career related questions go elsewhere. This community is focused in discussion of research and new projects that advance the state-of-the-art.
Limit self-promotion. Comments and posts should be first and foremost about topics of interest to ML observers and practitioners. Limited self-promotion is tolerated, but the sub is not here as merely a source for free advertisement. Such posts will be removed at the discretion of the mods.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

communick@academy.garden

[D] Is it legal to train on audio that is copyright infringing but not traditionally copyrighted? (alien.top)

submitted 11 months ago by SuperwhizAJ@alien.top to c/machinelearning@academy.garden

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I want to train a model for a musician based on piano covers they have recorded of popular songs and therefore own, but because of copyright infringement they still pay royalties to the writers of these songs. Curious if this is legal or not -- I would presume not since the recordings are not being monetized in this scenario but rather fed into a model, and the recordings are still owned 100% by the musician licensing them to me.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SuperwhizAJ@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Okay yes, technically it would very difficult to track and no one would probably even know the musician is using such a model. But as an academic, I'd prefer to do legal things only :P especially if I want to use results in a publication down the line.

And yes, I'd make money off it. would charge $x/full piano cover request.

[–] JustDoinNerdStuff@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

This is a bit of gray zone then. To be honest, I'd probably just do it because every major ai company in the world is already doing way worse than what you're doing, and making billions. The reality is their actions are creating legal precedent in your favor. Not LITERAL legal precedent, but abstract in the sense that every day they do business and DON'T get sued, we trend towards their actions being considered legal when it comes to blows later. It's an open secret that landmark laws and cases are often dictated simply by what aligns with the interests of the current government administration, not necessarily what is most fair to everyone, or even constitutional. If the US government is doing millions/billions of dollars worth of business with ai companies, and these companies are doing ethically 'gray' training, it's a pretty strong bet the judgements will be rigged in favor of Ai. I'm not telling you to betray your morals, but I'm just saying the wind is blowing that way, and it's hard to sail against it.