From melody to machine: who owns the future of creativity⁠?

The primary text, an article by Enrique Dans, argues that the backlash from some prominent artists against generative artificial intelligence stems from a desire to protect outdated business models rather than genuine concerns about innovation or legal copyright. Dans contends that AI training is an analytical process akin to a musician learning from existing works, not unauthorized copying or distribution. He contrasts the United Kingdom's receptive political climate to the music industry's lobbying efforts with the United States' more contentious situation, highlighting the firing of a Copyright Office director who expressed skepticism about AI training practices. The accompanying comments section features a discussion among readers, with some echoing Dans's points about copyright duration favoring artists over inventors and others expressing apprehension about AI's impact on artistic creation and the potential for widespread misuse.This article is also available in English on my Medium page, «From melody to machine: who owns the future of creativity?»

There are no comments yet.

Please log in to write the first comment.