Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by oszai 1169 days ago
It's going to be an interesting year. I wonder what the music industry is cooking in regards to generative sound. They'd be the ones to force us all to install a damn rootkit, they need to update their business model beyond the 1900s
3 comments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootk...

> Sony BMG copy protection rootkit scandal

> A scandal erupted in 2005 regarding Sony BMG's implementation of copy protection measures on about 22 million CDs. When inserted into a computer, the CDs installed one of two pieces of software that provided a form of digital rights management (DRM) by modifying the operating system to interfere with CD copying. Neither program could easily be uninstalled, and they created vulnerabilities that were exploited by unrelated malware. One of the programs would install and "phone home" with reports on the user's private listening habits, even if the user refused its end-user license agreement (EULA), while the other was not mentioned in the EULA at all. Both programs contained code from several pieces of copylefted free software in an apparent infringement of copyright, and configured the operating system to hide the software's existence, leading to both programs being classified as rootkits.

> Sony BMG initially denied that the rootkits were harmful. It then released an uninstaller for one of the programs that merely made the program's files visible while also installing additional software that could not be easily removed, collected an email address from the user and introduced further security vulnerabilities.

> Following public outcry, government investigations and class-action lawsuits in 2005 and 2006, Sony BMG partially addressed the scandal with consumer settlements, a recall of about 10% of the affected CDs and the suspension of CD copy-protection efforts in early 2007.

I remember that. We weren't allowed to put our music CDs in the family computer after that.
> I wonder what the music industry is cooking in regards to generative sound.

No need to wonder: "AI-generated songs on Apple Music and Spotify breach copyright, says music label UMG" https://9to5mac.com/2023/04/12/ai-generated-songs/

To be fair to the creators whose IP powers this generative AI, I think it's worth noting that model makers continue to expect to build their wealth on others' IP with no consequences: https://www.billboard.com/pro/universal-music-asks-spotify-a...

But this, specifically, seems to be right.

> Some of these songs are AI-generated covers of existing songs [...] Chatbots might use entire phrases, sentences, or more, from human authors. Similarly, music bots might replicate both music and lyrics from human artists

There is "learning" proper, as having assimilated the important elements of the experience (allowing to use those principles for further creation), and there is "copying".

> model makers continue to expect to build their wealth on others' IP with no consequences.

Is this not what record labels do?

Explicitly not. Labels have a contractual agreement with each creator that specifies every conceivable fine detail of the business arrangement.
Regulation of engineering, even in its more experimental sides (as I would depict some current stage expressions of Machine Learning), is an happening attempt.