Stockmusic.GPT now offers free, premade, stock music [with poll]
- Thread starter GtrString
- Start date
jbuhler
Senior Member
Lots of questions about this. Here are two: Does it indemnify against copyright infringement? Will it pass a contentID audit?
It gets pricey quickly as well, and it currently seems to have a limit of 180 seconds per song even at pro, $90 month, level. Or maybe I read those details wrong.
NekujaK
I didn't go to film school, I went to films -QT
Assuming it is really using AI to generate tracks, that AI still needs to be trained on existing music, and that music has to come from human contributors.
The way typical stock music, image, and video libraries work, is people upload contributions and earn a royalty whenever someone downloads one of their works.
In theory, bolting an AI engine onto such a system simply enables more variations in output, which is fine, AS LONG AS the original human contributors still get compensated when their works are used to generate the AI output.
In effect, it's essentially no different than existing royalty-free libraries, except that the AI engine is able to stretch the library's source content through recombining. As long as they're transparent about their use of source materials and pay the relevant contributors, this is pretty much business as usual.
The way typical stock music, image, and video libraries work, is people upload contributions and earn a royalty whenever someone downloads one of their works.
In theory, bolting an AI engine onto such a system simply enables more variations in output, which is fine, AS LONG AS the original human contributors still get compensated when their works are used to generate the AI output.
In effect, it's essentially no different than existing royalty-free libraries, except that the AI engine is able to stretch the library's source content through recombining. As long as they're transparent about their use of source materials and pay the relevant contributors, this is pretty much business as usual.
jbuhler
Senior Member
Given our tech bros’ penchant to take without paying I quite imagine that it’s their business as usual not music libraries’. It would be in some of these libraries’ practice to sell its composers out for pennies however. So I’d say the odds are low that anyone who made the music to train the AI will make money from this.
OP
OP
GtrString
Senior Member
This is "business as usual"?
(from the FAQ): https://stockmusicgpt.com/#faqs
"StockMusicGPT is an AI Music Generator that composes royalty-free music tailored to your content. Whether you're a video editor, a podcaster, or just an everyday content creator, our straightforward process aims to empower you to produce personalized AI tunes tailored to your requirements within minutes."
(from the FAQ): https://stockmusicgpt.com/#faqs
"StockMusicGPT is an AI Music Generator that composes royalty-free music tailored to your content. Whether you're a video editor, a podcaster, or just an everyday content creator, our straightforward process aims to empower you to produce personalized AI tunes tailored to your requirements within minutes."
"... the music generated by StockMusicGPT is copyright-free. You have the right to use it in your projects without worrying about copyright issues."
"The music produced by StockMusicGPT is royalty-free, meaning you can use it in your projects without having to pay ongoing royalties. Once you've generated the music, it's yours to use without any additional cost."
jbuhler
Senior Member
I saw this and was looking for the fine print on liability if a copyright infringement claim was made.
Since it’s “composed” by AI it currently has to be without copyright in the US, so the clause itself is not surprising. I haven’t generated anything with it so I don’t know if it has Udio’s problem of the training data remaining at levels that will result in lawsuits if used in a commercial production.
OP
OP
GtrString
Senior Member
I don't know either, it might be one trained on the Audiosparx catalog or others that (re)sold rights to these tech companies, but it certainly needs a lot of data to work. Lawsuits are inevitable, but who knows how these companies are funded, maybe Elon Musk is backstage to fund the trials..
NekujaK
I didn't go to film school, I went to films -QT
Hence my "As long as..." qualification. I have no idea what their actual business practices are.
They also allow you to upload your own music to be used as a generative source. And I'll bet they absorb those uploads into their content pool for future renderings without ever paying the contributors.
This speaks to the bigger issue of transparency and accountability with all AI engines in general. Without any details about the datasets used for training and generating works, AI companies can't be held accountable, and the burden falls on the content contributors to recognize and sue for compensation, which is highly onerous.
One of the most helpful acts of legislation we can get is to require full content-related transparency from AI companies.
NekujaK
I didn't go to film school, I went to films -QT
At the end of the day, this is the same value proposition offered by any royalty-free stock music library. The only difference is that instead searching for music in a static catalog, their search engine is able to dynamically conjure up music that theoretically matches what you're looking for.
The end result is the same in both cases: royalty-free stock music. How that music got created, is what's different.
Daryl
Senior Member
I think it will apply equally to all media composers.
Daryl
Senior Member
Only if it gets an awful lot better than these offerings, which are laughably bad.
Alchemedia
Decomposer
Perhaps, however, it won't be long now.
Also, the vast majority of consumers wouldn't know the difference.
Daryl
Senior Member
Those vast majority of consumers won't want to pay anyway, so they can be ignored. It's when paying customers choose to go the AI route that one should be concerned.
nitrateaudio
Active Member
Interesting site. Never heard of it before.
mikrokosmiko
Active Member
I understand that "normal" people probably would not care, but... the audio examples do not sound particularly good, do they?
I'm actually not sorry for the likes of "horder music libraries" they were hoping to keep exploiting composers and are the first to get f...d now.
It will be interesting to see when one of those small online projects has a bit of success and makes some money while having an AI created track with Peter Gabriel's voice and a melody too close to something well known. The creator might get sued and that might ignite some interesting legal action to rock these AI pirate companies ...
It will be interesting to see when one of those small online projects has a bit of success and makes some money while having an AI created track with Peter Gabriel's voice and a melody too close to something well known. The creator might get sued and that might ignite some interesting legal action to rock these AI pirate companies ...
jbuhler
Senior Member
For much of the very low end stuff, the users need cheap and the ability to pass ContentID. Many are happy to pay a small fee so long as they can be assured the music will clear ContentID.
