"Suno’s training data includes essentially all music files of reasonable quality that are accessible on the open internet."

“Suno’s training data includes essentially all music files of reasonable quality that are accessible on the open internet.”

“Rather than trying to argue that Suno was not trained on copyrighted songs, the company is instead making a Fair Use argument to say that the law should allow for AI training on copyrighted works without permission or compensation.”

Archived (also bypass paywall): https://archive.ph/ivTGs

  • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.orgEnglish
    0·
    3 months ago

    I just don’t get how we can’t just sue them. You’d think the big copyright holders, record labels in this case, would be all over that.

    • JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.chEnglish
      0·
      3 months ago

      Uhm, this came out as part of a law suit against them by the record industry? So they are in the process of being sued.

      While not surprising, the admission, which was made as part of court proceedings responding to a massive recording industry lawsuit against the company, shows yet again that many AI tools are trained on, essentially, anything that companies can get their hands on.

      • CosmoNova@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        3 months ago

        Thank you. I‘m honestly baffled at the amount of comments talking out of their ass in this thread as if the legal system has made 0 progress or effort to deal with anything AI related by now. It‘s reminiscent of how cryptobros talked about NFTs not so long ago and how all the scammers are untouchable because laws don‘t mention NFTs directly or something. AI is the largest case of copyright infringement ever committed and labels do not give a damn about subjective and debatable „but it’s transformative“ arguments. Again, it‘s baffling.