GNU social JP
  • FAQ
  • Login
GNU social JPは日本のGNU socialサーバーです。
Usage/ToS/admin/test/Pleroma FE
  • Public

    • Public
    • Network
    • Groups
    • Featured
    • Popular
    • People

Conversation

Notices

  1. Embed this notice
    Christine Lemmer-Webber (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Saturday, 23-May-2026 23:00:11 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber Christine Lemmer-Webber

    Spotify and UMG strike a deal: users can pay extra to make their own "AI remixes" of licensed artists https://www.billboard.com/pro/spotify-and-umg-strike-licensing-deal-for-ai-covers-remixes/

    And so. What does this mean for FOSS?

    What a question! What do I mean even?

    Well what does it mean for projects which have accepted AIgen patches? UMG and spotify are going to want to make sure that users *have to* pay a premium for such a service. And so what do you think they're going to push for, copyright-wise?

    That's right, if they can make a legal case that the slurry of inputs *can* result in copyrighted output, well...

    What does that mean for AIgen patches applied to FOSS projects? What legal terms, from their slurry of inputs, carry forward? What about attribution, a requirement in even the most permissive of most FOSS licenses? To say nothing of copyleft, and also code released without a license, etc.

    FOSS projects welcoming AIgen patches may be sitting on a ticking time bomb.

    In conversation about 2 months ago from social.coop permalink

    Attachments

    1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: www.billboard.com
      And All That Could Have Been
      from Billboard Staff
      With today's studio technology, live albums can often be sterilized to a point where the spontaneous energy is drained out of the recording.
    • Embed this notice
      Christine Lemmer-Webber (cwebber@social.coop)'s status on Saturday, 23-May-2026 23:04:27 JST Christine Lemmer-Webber Christine Lemmer-Webber
      in reply to

      We don't know what the courts will rule, what laws will pass. But we know what the incentives of Disney, the RIAA, have on the copyrighted *inputs* side.

      And what about those running the models? What about them?

      They might have a harder case, people bring up the monkey with a camera case, but this is a risk also. OpenAI's CFO explicitly said in an interview that it would like to pull a Unity, and suddenly upend the situation customers have come to expect and get a licensing cut of every piece of profit assisted by them. https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-cfo-sarah-friar-future-revenue-sources-2026-1

      The problem with all this is that the legal area is *uncertain*. And it's even more uncertain because it will be ages before there is *international consensus* on how to handle these things.

      In conversation about 2 months ago permalink

      Attachments


    • Embed this notice
      Billy Smith (billysmith@social.coop)'s status on Sunday, 24-May-2026 01:14:05 JST Billy Smith Billy Smith
      in reply to

      @cwebber

      And will they pass that money on to all of the people whose work was stolen to create the training data?

      In conversation about 2 months ago permalink

Feeds

  • Activity Streams
  • RSS 2.0
  • Atom
  • Help
  • About
  • FAQ
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • Source
  • Version
  • Contact

GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.