51–60 of 180 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could use https://vocalremover.org/ to remove music. I've used it for sampling speech out of tv programmes with background audio and the results are immense.
Whoa, tried https://vocalremover.org/splitter-ai on a couple tracks and it sounds better than Spleeter, Demucs and Serato. What model do they use?
"Good artists copy, great artists steal"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a tired cliche. Does Supabase owe him royalties when they use that same model that trained on Eminem’s lyrics to make a chat bot that can interact with their support documentation? https://supabase.com/blog/chatgpt-supabase-docs
Chat bots are not in competition with Eminem in his industry. Whereas other music artists are. Its entirely fair game for subjects in a given field to protest when an AI is trained on their work and then is used to power competition to them without any form of remuneration or licensing to compensate them.
Logically, the model must be considered in fair use if we are to allow Supabase Clippy. This is how the courts will see it!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using impersonators has its own issues. e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midler_v._Ford_Motor_Co .
But that’s in a commercial setting, this is during a musical performance. The audience was not tricked into showing up to an Eminem performance and were not tricked into thinking that Eminem was on stage at any point. This is protected speech.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which artist will be the first to sell a licensed LLM (and other models?) trained on their own discography?
Well now that’s an interesting thought. I bet you’re absolutely right with this prediction.
The music industry will not like this, seems like a short circuit around royalties and the value of a music deal with an artist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that’s in a commercial setting, this is during a musical performance. The audience was not tricked into showing up to an Eminem performance and were not tricked into thinking that Eminem was on stage at any point. This is protected speech.
> This is protected speech According to a quick google search, even cover bands performing live are required to pay royalties to the original artists whose songs they're performing. Maybe there's some loophole when using an artist's likeness while changing the actual music and lyrics, I don't know. But "protected speech" isn't meant to be a way to make money off of other people's work. Curious what part of "Midler v.…
It's more than that. If you were part of a band and now you are solo (plenty of cases), you need to pay your old band if you play an old song you were part of (unless you own 100% of the lyrics and music rights, which is rare).
By the way, I am totalyl OK with this deal/agreement/way of doing things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a tired cliche. Does Supabase owe him royalties when they use that same model that trained on Eminem’s lyrics to make a chat bot that can interact with their support documentation? https://supabase.com/blog/chatgpt-supabase-docs
Possibly yes, though it's more likely that OpenAI owes royalties on the revenue they get from ChatGPT. We have yet to see this play out in court, but we likely will in the following years.
It took the Supreme Court to overrule, where they created the legal doctrine of “commercially significant non-infringing use” as part of determining fair use. They looked at the VHS rental market and the numerous other industries that were dependent on this technology. The courts do not want to be in a position where a ruling can have a profound impact on commerce especially when balanced with extending copyright claims at the detriment to freedoms of speech.
This is why legal experts keep saying the model and the outputs will be considered different and why the model itself is fair use and why the risk-averse lawyers at Microsoft are getting behind these tools… and even why they are letting people build on top of them before they were ready for prime time, to flood the market with non-infringing uses!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see why he would need ChatGPT, seems like a short enough snippet to just write it yourself
I'd bet he got more lyrics than that from ChatGPT, but was unable to make Uberduck "rap" something that matches the rhythm in any meaningful capacity. So he ended up using just a short snippet of the output. Even the real Eminem sounds horrible around that speed (~130 BPM), you're way more likely to hear a Drake mashup in that range (or up-until-recently Kanye). I know these sorts of famous AI voice generators don't…