AI is here and here to stay whether we choose to adopt it or not.
Like Joanne, I am all over this because I am primarily a musician as in playing an instrument and writing the musical parts. Lyrics are something where extra assistance is welcomed. Same with SynthV because I am not a naturally good singer. Using these tools together gets me to a stage where I can develop a song further.
The SongBrain app that I wrote enables me to do this and it isn't just a case of me being lazy, there's a couple of thousand lines of code in there!
Commercially successful (as in making loads of money) songs have nothing to do with the song usually. It's about the amount of promotion budget, image of the artist etc. and of course, we are in it for the art not to make money (sure).
The litigious arguments are moot in some way because AI is not going away and it has caught a large established industry off guard. Things will sort themselves eventually (after a lot of money has been spent).
Sharp businesses will find a country where AI output can be copyrighted and base their services there perhaps. After all, how much of the world's shipping carry a "flag of covenience" usually Liberia or somewhere.
This is a great thread and an imortant one and opens up may questions about where assistance begins and ends.
Hopefully, the alphabet is out of copyright now or I'm in bother.
My comment was simply that the legal/liability ramifications of AI generated intellectual property are being scrutinized and it MAY become something actionable. If it were me, I wouldn't use it for commercially released music until it all plays out. Who knows what will happen, they may force AI programs to put a digital watermark on AI generated content. I can absolutely see the PROs (BMI, ASCAP, etc.) adding something the song registration process where you have to disclose if you used AI in the creation of the song (the do this very thing currently for songs using song samples).
Point being, the technology was released before the legality of it was determined. That's enough for me, as a creator, to take a more cautious approach to using it.
I think where clear cut understandings of AI e.g., chatgpt, Bard etc are defined, that's one thing but where is that unclear line between algorithmic generation and AI? Many apps / vsts claim to be AI when in fact they are clever algorithms. The term AI is quite nebulous but I think most us would agree that machine learning and neural networks are broadly defined as AI. Therefore when asked to declare whether AI had been used the chances of being overdeclared and underclared are pretty equal I'd say. I think the onus would be for whatever assistive technology is there e.g., BIAB, RapidComposer etc etc has to clearly state whether it is AI or not.
What a minefield!
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
You obviously haven't been paying attention and haven't got the slightest understanding about what the courts have ruled.
Last edited by Byron Dickens; 01/26/2401:23 PM.
Byron Dickens
BIAB. CbB. Mixbus 32C 8 HP Envy. Intel core i7. 16GB RAM W10. Focusrite Scarlett 18i 20. Various instruments played with varying degrees of proficiency.
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
You obviously haven't been paying attention and haven't got the slightest understanding about what the courts have ruled.
I did however pay attention to the title of this thread which was: "has anyone on this forum used chatgpt to help them write lyrics" as opposed to sub discussions as to what may or may not have already been decided by courts.
I am speaking in general terms and speculating how this may go in the future if the whole world goes super twitchy about AI, is it ok to do that in your thread?
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
I think you're mixing apples and oranges.
The question that was before the court was whether an "original work" created a non-human process could be given a copyright. Whether or not the underlying algorithm was AI didn't have any part of the legal question.
The court made a ruling strictly on a matter of law - copyright is only conferred to works created by a human.
The question that you're raising is whether the use of an AI plugin confers any rights to to the manufacturer. The answer still has nothing to do with whether the plugin is AI or not - it's got to do with the product license.
For example, I could create a plugin that boosts the volume of audio by 100%, and the license would demand that using that plugin obliges the end user to share 50% of the net profits of any audio run through the plugin.
And... it would be perfectly legal. That's why it's a good thing to read the EULA.
After following this thread here is my take. Putting aside the copyright side of things.
(1) I use chatgpt or something similar to create lyrics from a prompt.
(2) I write lyrics myself with whatever comes to mind without chatgpt.
In either case how would anyone know which was which. Chatgpt would probably give me something slightly better as I am rubbish at lyrics. Will they use AI to analyse the output, would AI be correct in working out which was which?
^^^ my point exactly 3. I use chat gpt to generate some lyrics and change them a bit (or a lot) How would they know the difference? It is just text in a notepad. It is not a picture.
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
I think you're mixing apples and oranges.
The question that was before the court was whether an "original work" created a non-human process could be given a copyright. Whether or not the underlying algorithm was AI didn't have any part of the legal question.
The court made a ruling strictly on a matter of law - copyright is only conferred to works created by a human.
I was meaning more along the lines of a previous statement which said that PROs may insist on knowing if AI was used in any part of the song. "Created" is also nebulous unless it means in entirety, in which case, that's another can of worms.
Does the fact that a human "created" the prompt, count? Or, are we saying that the "machine" decides one day to write a song unsolicited and send it to me?
I was meaning more along the lines of a previous statement which said that PROs may insist on knowing if AI was used in any part of the song.
Ah, thanks for the clarification.
Rodger Brown's comment was speculation.
From a legal point of view, songs created by AI can't be copyrighted. That puts them in the public domain, free to use.
However, only the lyrics of the song would be public domain. So if you wrote a song using those lyrics, all the other elements of the song would not be in the public domain.
For example, look and songs that Janice and Bud release. Even though the lyrics are in the public domain, they've created versions that are often made unique by re-working the lyrics, arrangement, and harmonies. So they own that particular version of the song, including the mechanical and sync rights.
Plus, any changes to public domain lyrics are copyright the person who made the changes.
So even if someone knows that the lyrics were generated by AI, unless they know for sure that all the lyrics were the product of AI, using the lyrics would be a risky proposition. More on that later...
Originally Posted by Mike. R.
"Created" is also nebulous unless it means in entirety, in which case, that's another can of worms.
Does the fact that a human "created" the prompt, count? Or, are we saying that the "machine" decides one day to write a song unsolicited and send it to me?
IANAL, but I suggest that even though a human created the prompt, the courts are likely to find that the AI would have created the lyrics. That's because:
1. The ideas at the prompt aren't likely to be original; and even if they were, 2. The AI can generate hundreds of different songs from the prompt, demonstrating what makes each song original is the work by the AI, not the prompt.
In any event, it would be safest to treat AI lyrics the same as public domain lyrics.
Originally Posted by JoanneCooper
3. I use chat gpt to generate some lyrics and change them a bit (or a lot) How would they know the difference? It is just text in a notepad. It is not a picture
However, OpenAI, the company that owns ChatGPT, keep a log of your conversation history, including "your email address, device, IP address and location, as well as any public or private information you use in your ChatGPT prompts."
So if there were a lawsuit claiming that song lyrics that an author claimed to own the copyright to were actually public domain, they could be compelled to produce the AI lyrics - even if they lyrics were generate via a third party tool such as your own.
Again, IANAL, but if you wanted to use AI lyrics for inspiration, but wanted to hold the final copyright, it would make sense to keep the original version of the AI lyrics, and make sure the final version was sufficiently different.
Lennon, while critical of Harrison, was well aware of how easy it was to accidentally mimic another song: “In the early years, I’d often carry around someone else’s song in my head, and only when I’d put it down on tape — because I can’t write music — would I consciously change it to my own melody because I knew that otherwise somebody would sue me,” John said in 1980. “George could have changed a few bars in that song and nobody could have ever touched him, but he just let it go and paid the price. Maybe he thought God would just sort of let him off.”
Interesting thread. I've no opinion on the legality of ChatGPT or other ai. So, I have no comment on that aspect but regarding the thread question, here's my comment.
I wanted to see how ChatPGT compared to a fairly complex song lyric of an existing song and I queried ChatPGT to write lyrics for a song that I described the story from an original tune.
I decided to request lyrics from ChatGPT to the story in a song by singer/songwriter Guthrie Thomas of an original song of his titled, "Melissa" and compare the quality of lyrics between the two. Here are the results: My lyric request to ChatGPT: User: write song lyrics about a waitress named Melissa that travels by her older, worn out car planning to visit family for Christmas. The weather is icy and with snow fall. There's a bad auto accident on Melissa's trip home with an 18 wheeler driven by a drunk driver and Melissa is killed. There are thousands of people mourning Melissa at her funeral.
It came up with accurate lyrics but nothing as picturesque and with imagery to equal the original. I've attached lyrics from both sources of Guthrie Thomas's song, "Melissa" and ChatPGT's lyrical composition of the same story.
Nice one Charlie. You got a decent response and it may also depend on the song or how much you feed the prompt. I tried something similar (for academic purposes) by asking for some lyrics about a lady who's sure ... etc and put the entire 1st verse in and asked for the result to be influenced by LZ.
What I got back was very close to the lyrics to STH.
Very interesting, and, this copyright thing is very complex. From what I can see as a "man in the street, who obviously doesn't understand these things", is that the AI generated lyrics can't be copyrighted but an original song can be even if it includes the AI lyrics. So what's the problem if someone else wants to use the same lyrics in a different song? You still get the rights to your own song so who cares?
This is just an intermediate issue anyway because, it will only be a matter of time before anyone with no musical skill whatsoever can say something like "Give me a new Stones Album ca 1973" and get a perfect 12 track album of new songs exactly like that. Sure they can't sell it but who'd buy it anyway when they can fire off the same prompts themselves and enjoy "New" material?
Music will be produced and consumed in an entirely new way and imagine being able to bring old musicians "back to life" and enjoy even more from them than their original catalogue.
These are just my views of course, but just because we feel there is a moral sense not to do it, you can bet if there's money to be made or saved then someone will
re: this statement - "That puts them in the public domain, free to use."
I don't believe that to be the case necessarily, because if the lyrics in question were in any way derivative, there possibly could be a claim against it. Again, all of this is speculation at this point, but if (for example) you said "I want something similar to 'Help Me Make It Through The Night'", there's an argument to be made that Kristofferson's song was the "source material".
It's going to be interesting to see how it all plays out.
Also, and someone correct me on this if I'm wrong, I believe when you copyright a song that includes lyrics, there isn't a distinction between the words and music unless you file copyrights on both. In other words, if the music infringes on another work, the entire song (including lyrics) is liable.
In other words, if the music infringes on another work, the entire song (including lyrics) is liable.
Well, people who sue for infringement will claim they then own some share in the infringing song's profits. What part of the song is infringing won't matter, so it could be lyrics, melody, a bassline... whatever.
How much of the profits they feel they are due depends on different factors, but I supect it's more a function of "how much to we think we can get" rather than some actual calculation.
From what I can see as a "man in the street, who obviously doesn't understand these things", is that the AI generated lyrics can't be copyrighted but an original song can be even if it includes the AI lyrics. So what's the problem if someone else wants to use the same lyrics in a different song? You still get the rights to your own song so who cares?
The AI lyrics I’ve read would fit nicely in the Victorian era given the extraordinarily high usage of forced rhymes.
Bud
You could be onto something there Bud.
"Oh dear Queen Victoria, ruler of the throne, In this missive to you, my wit is finely honed. A jest or two, I bring forth with glee, For laughter, my dear, is the best courtesy.
And as for Prince Albert, your steadfast mate, I hear he fancies a waltz, both early and late. With a twirl and a dip, they dance with grace, A royal ballroom, a most amusing space."
By William Gladstone apparently, from the time when he fancied himself as a songwriter, but he gave up and became Prime Minister instead.
Last edited by Mike. R.; 02/01/2407:03 AM. Reason: Forgot to say, I got ChatGPT to write that.
The AI lyrics I’ve read would fit nicely in the Victorian era given the extraordinarily high usage of forced rhymes.
Bud
You could be onto something there Bud.
"Oh dear Queen Victoria, ruler of the throne, In this missive to you, my wit is finely honed. A jest or two, I bring forth with glee, For laughter, my dear, is the best courtesy.
And as for Prince Albert, your steadfast mate, I hear he fancies a waltz, both early and late. With a twirl and a dip, they dance with grace, A royal ballroom, a most amusing space."
By William Gladstone apparently, from the time when he fancied himself as a songwriter, but he gave up and became Prime Minister instead.
Originally Posted by JoanneCooper The OP wasn't discussing ai generated songs but rather ai generated lyrics. Ai is just a tool. Same as BIAB is a tool. Use it, don’t use it but don’t shoot down those who do.
I find it a bit odd that people who use machines to assist with the generation of music are so against using machines to help generate lyrics.
Actually, the Librarian of Congress ruled exactly that, an appeals court upheld it and SCOTUS has declined to take up the case. In the US, that ruling has the effect of law.
As I have posted earlier, withhout that ruling, the WGA writers's strike would not have settled. Scripts, like lyrics, are words. Congress has many bills trying to codify this ruling but there's nothing in any of these bills invalidating the concept.
In the meantime, the WGA settlement has put forward a framework on how to apply these ideas into rules that both producers and writers can use going forward. I will recommend that you read that and do some research instead of twisting what others post into things they never meant.
The only person who has suggested not using AI in the creative process is you. There's no copyright police here except in your imagination. Please stop.
Generate Lyrics for your Band-in-a-Box songs with LyricLab!
Need some lyrics to complete your Band-in-a-Box song? LyricLab is here to help!
LyricLab (by Joanne Cooper) is an AI-powered tool designed to quickly create lyrics and chords to fit your music. Just enter a rough idea of your lyrics, and let the AI bring them to life. Once you're happy with the results, simply import the LyricLab file into Band-in-a-Box® 2024 or newer. From there, you can pick your style and generate melodies to match your song’s chords!
Ci siamo dati da fare e abbiamo aggiunto oltre 50 nuove funzionalità e una straordinaria raccolta di nuovi contenuti, tra cui 222 RealTracks, nuovi RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, "Songs with Vocals" Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 3, Playable RealDrums Set 2, due nuovi set di "RealDrums Stems", XPro Styles PAK 6, Xtra Styles PAK 17 e altro ancora!
Wir waren fleißig und haben über 50 neue Funktionen und eine erstaunliche Sammlung neuer Inhalte hinzugefügt, darunter 222 RealTracks, neue RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, "Songs with Vocals" Artist Performance Sets, abspielbare RealTracks Set 3, abspielbare RealDrums Set 2, zwei neue Sets von "RealDrums Stems", XPro Styles PAK & 7, Xtra Styles PAK 17 & 18, und mehr!
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 apporte plus de 50 fonctions nouvelles ainsi qu'une importante de contenus nouveaux à savoir : 222 RealTracks, des RealStyles nouveaux, des SuperTracks MIDI, des Etudes d'Instruments, des Prestations d'Artistes, des "Morceaux avec Choeurs", un Set 3 de Tracks Jouables, un Set 2 de RealDrums Jouables, deux nouveaux Sets de "RealDrums Stems", des Styles XPro PAK 6 & 7, des Xtra Styles PAK 17 & 18, et bien plus encore!
New! XPro Styles PAK 7 for Band-in-a-Box 2024 for Mac!
We've just released XPro Styles PAK 7 with 100 brand new RealStyles, plus 50 RealTracks and RealDrums that are sure to delight!
With XPro Styles PAK 7 you can expect 25 rock & pop, 25 jazz, and 25 country styles, as well as 25 of this year's wildcard genre: Celtic!
Here's a small sampling of what XPro Styles PAK 7 has to offer: energetic rock jigs, New Orleans funk, lilting jazz waltzes, fast Celtic punk, uptempo train beats, gritty grunge, intense jazz rock, groovy EDM, soulful R&B, soft singer-songwriter pop, country blues rock, and many more!
Special Pricing! Until September 30, 2024, all the XPro Styles PAKs 1 - 7 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea)! Supercharge your Band-in-a-Box 2024® with XPro Styles PAK 7! Order now!
XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2024 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
New! Xtra Styles PAK 18 for Band-in-a-Box 2024 for Mac!
Xtra Styles PAK 18 for Band-in-a-Box version 2024 is here with 200 brand new styles to take for a spin!
Along with 50 new styles each for the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres, we’ve put together a collection of styles using sounds from the SynthMaster plugin!
In this PAK you'll find: dubby reggae grooves, rootsy Americana, LA jazz pop, driving pop rock, mellow electronica, modern jazz fusion, spacey country ballads, Motown shuffles, energetic EDM, and plenty of synth heavy grooves! Xtra Style PAK 18 features these styles and many, many more!
Special Pricing! Until September 30, 2024, all the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 18 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea)! Expand your Band-in-a-Box 2024® library with Xtra Styles PAK 18! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 18 here.
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 18 requires the 2024 UltraPAK/UltraPAK+/Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
New! Xtra Styles PAK 18 for Band-in-a-Box 2024 for Windows!
Xtra Styles PAK 18 for Band-in-a-Box version 2024 is here with 200 brand new styles to take for a spin!
Along with 50 new styles each for the rock & pop, jazz, and country genres, we’ve put together a collection of styles using sounds from the SynthMaster plugin!
In this PAK you'll find: dubby reggae grooves, rootsy Americana, LA jazz pop, driving pop rock, mellow electronica, modern jazz fusion, spacey country ballads, Motown shuffles, energetic EDM, and plenty of synth heavy grooves! Xtra Style PAK 18 features these styles and many, many more!
Special Pricing! Until September 30, 2024, all the Xtra Styles PAKs 1 - 18 are on sale for only $29 ea (Reg. $49 ea)! Expand your Band-in-a-Box 2024® library with Xtra Styles PAK 18! Order now!
Learn more and listen to demos of the Xtra Styles PAK 18 here.
Note: The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 18 requires the 2024 UltraPAK/UltraPAK+/Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version because they need the RealTracks from the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you over the phone. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday, and 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST Saturday. We are closed Sunday. You can also send us your questions via email.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you on our Live Chat or by email. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST (GMT -8) Saturday; Closed Sunday.
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean