Grimes Tells Fans To Deepfake Her Music, Will Split 50% Royalties With AI (forbes.com) 63
Canadian singer-songwriter Grimes has invited her fans to create music using her voice, stating that she would split 50% of royalties for any successful AI-generated song using her voice. On Sunday night she tweeted: "I'll split 50% royalties on any successful AI generated song that uses my voice. Same deal as I would with any artist i collab with. Feel free to use my voice without penalty. I have no label and no legal bindings."
She also said she welcomes the open sourcing of art and an end to copyright. "Im just curious what even happens and interested in being a Guinea pig." From a report: Grimes has long embraced AI as a techno artist. In 2020, her first album to top the Billboard dance charts was Miss Anthropocene, named for the effects of technology on Earth's ecology and climate in the post-Industrial Revolution era. It was also in 2020 that she teamed up with the algorithmic mood music startup Endel to create an AI-generated lullaby for her first child with SpaceX founder Elon Musk who they named X AE A-12 with the Elven spelling of AI, according to Grimes.
"Everyday I thank the overlords of Ableton for cleaning up my tracks, but I do worry though that AI will outpace us and make musicians obsolete. It's inevitable," she warned at Web Summit 2020. With millions of followers across YouTube, Instagram and Twitter and hits like Oblivion, Kill V. Maim and Go, her call for AI collaboration could be a game changer.
She also said she welcomes the open sourcing of art and an end to copyright. "Im just curious what even happens and interested in being a Guinea pig." From a report: Grimes has long embraced AI as a techno artist. In 2020, her first album to top the Billboard dance charts was Miss Anthropocene, named for the effects of technology on Earth's ecology and climate in the post-Industrial Revolution era. It was also in 2020 that she teamed up with the algorithmic mood music startup Endel to create an AI-generated lullaby for her first child with SpaceX founder Elon Musk who they named X AE A-12 with the Elven spelling of AI, according to Grimes.
"Everyday I thank the overlords of Ableton for cleaning up my tracks, but I do worry though that AI will outpace us and make musicians obsolete. It's inevitable," she warned at Web Summit 2020. With millions of followers across YouTube, Instagram and Twitter and hits like Oblivion, Kill V. Maim and Go, her call for AI collaboration could be a game changer.
What could possibly go wrong? (Score:2)
How long will it take for someone to come up with something just to burn her career?
Re: What could possibly go wrong? (Score:2)
And will it be Elon?
Re: What could possibly go wrong? (Score:3)
Re: What could possibly go wrong? (Score:2)
Didn't fuck Henry Ford.
Re:What could possibly go wrong? (Score:4, Insightful)
I suspect Grimes is hoping this gets her some publicity that doesn't involve bearing Elon Musk's kids - since she's learned that's not exactly an exclusive club.
Re: What could possibly go wrong? (Score:2)
Between the two she's the genius and I don't even think that's controversial anymore (unlike the Buddy Holly turned hippie bandwagon vs one of the greatest performance artists ever that history still hasn't turned on).
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting to me how there's always one or two ideologies in each age that attract the most hateful and most anti-human people.
And how it's really easy to figure out the people oriented towards those ideologies today. Because like most people who orient themselves toward this sort of set of ideologies focused on hatred and directed towards individuals as part of hatred of humans, they tend to focus their ideological hatred on the people, not the ideas. Ideas simply provide them with guidance what peop
Re: (Score:2)
That's gonna happen anyway. You think anyone who wants to sink her gives a fuck about whether it's "legal"? Make a song, release it on the internet, and it's out. C'mon, the MAFIAA with all their money can't keep those bootlegs from circulating.
That way she at least makes a cut of her demise. It's probably as good as it gets.
Re: (Score:2)
How long will it take for someone to come up with something just to burn her career?
You mean the music industry?
Re: (Score:2)
What career, seems like a desperate move to stay relevant.
Re: What could possibly go wrong? (Score:1)
She doesn't have to endorse or allow her likeness to be used. She's obviously going to protect her brand.
Re: (Score:2)
“I'll split 50% royalties on any successful AI generated song that uses my voice. Same deal as I would with any artist i collab with. Feel free to use my voice without penalty. I have no label and no legal bindings.”
And although it might go away pending scotus decision afaik the rogers test still stands.
Successful artist are fighting AI copycats (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Such elaborate thoughts, you truly are a philosopher of our times!
Re:Pretty common (Score:4, Interesting)
People who don't have much to lose wants free shared copyright free everything People who worked really hard to acquire what they have want protection, licensing and rights to prevent people from breaking down their hard work to a few extra bucks.
That's a really long way of saying that artists might not mind while studios whose only asset is licensing care a hell of a lot. The artists themselves make a lot of their money by touring, so even if they lost 100% of the revenue from the sale of songs they'd still be okay, while the studios would be left with nothing.
TBH while the middlemen have served a purpose, they can go out of business and all we lose are the gatekeepers who tell us to listen to a musician because they own their work. With the rise of crowdsourcing and social media, people are perfectly capable of finding and supporting artists via grassroots rather than some corporate stooge that curated his assets for them. I'm sure there are plenty of music journalists and fans who would be happy to rise as the new source of music curation for the masses.
Re: (Score:3)
This started happening from 2007 in Japan, with the release of the Vocaloid software and its mascot Hatsune Miku.
It was originally designed mostly for backing vocals, basically a synth for the human voice. It wasn't even particularly great, sounding rather robotic. It did democratize pop music though. Suddenly anyone with a copy of Vocaloid could make a Hatsune Miku pop song, and they started appearing on video sites like NicoNico and YouTube. Other people started making music videos for them. Eventually Ha
Re: (Score:3)
A very large amount of successful people who "made it" have throughout history put great emphasis on creating a legacy by giving others access to as much of their work as possible in any way they can enable it. She's in a club of people widely recognized as intellectual giants, and not just in creative fields. Pretty much all scientists are in the same boat.
It's usually the least talented and least capable (and by extension successful) creatives who are in desperate need of every bit of income potential fro
Re: (Score:2)
I have nothing backwards. These are from videos of real people in interviews discussing what they want, and what they don't want, but people want to mod it down anyway. Youtube is full of videos of people being interviewed exhibiting the exact behavior I described.
The exception you're talking about it's people who already have enough, are more likely to be okay with sharing the excess and not needing 'more'.
However if they had to work at mcdonalds to support themselves while everyone enjoyed their content f
Re: (Score:2)
Your last sentence nailed it. Your post is talking about destructive envy of a failed creative, who wants to burn the system down because it didn't allow him to be the next Da Vinci.
Personal responsibility, that it's his lack of talent or hard work or just ability to produce thins that people actually want to consume, that's irrelevant. It's the collective responsibility that matters, because that can be de-personalized from personal failures of a prototypical McDonalds employed creative who has no success
Re: (Score:1)
The rest is simply the expression of this destructive envy, down to the point of denying relevance of one of the most important drives that exists in most successful people. The need to build legacy.
Okay so you're wording is clever and what not and maybe will confuse some people to not be able to break it down and simplify it, what you basically said was "Successful people won't be at Mcdonalds so this doesn't apply". You're also saying people who are working there and aren't successful from their creative process has destructive envy. While that might be true for some people, that's not the scenario I presented.
What I'm presenting is that if someone put time, and effort into making a movie, and it was
Re: (Score:2)
>You're also saying people who are working there and aren't successful from their creative process has destructive envy.
Oh no, I'm saying something far, far stronger than that. I'm saying that destructive form of envy is typical of people who fail in their personal goals, and then externalize blame to others. It's never their fault, it's always the fault of someone else. Be it some outgroup of people of their choice, or some individual they lost some key competition to, or even the environment in which e
Re: (Score:1)
You've made some good points, I appreciate the time you took to write that.
You're right, there are a ton of people who without merit thing they are just as qualified and capable as another when anyone on the outside would clearly see they are not.
I should say that I also don't think the copyright system we currently have is perfect by any means, and fails often in the spirit of the concept, and I don't have the solution for how it should work. The problems I think we have with some of the examples is the pr
Re: (Score:1)
I'd also like to add there countries without the same copyright laws or don't validate western ones, who absolutely only have the advancement they have from stealing technology from other countries, and did not spend the resources and time to develop it on their own. I don't think you're advocating people just stealing other peoples work and benefiting from it, because f*k that then, I'll wait for them to make it and just steal it from them, way easier.
Re: (Score:2)
Not the way it works. First you can't steal IP. While it's become a meme because of constant copyright holder PR, you won't find this formulation in copyright. Copyright handles right to copy. You can't steal "making a copy". You can make a copy that is not permitted by the rights holder. One is infringement on natural human right of private property.. Other is granting copyright owners a right to infringe on natural right of others to learn from and copy others. Precedent for both natural rights in questio
Re: (Score:1)
I'll also add that I've heard people advocate for free use of tools and other work performed by other people. Anytime I suggested that they set the example, and provide the tools, funding, or access to whatever it is they think they should be able to freely use, they balk at the idea, and just want someone else to provide it to them.
Royalties? (Score:2)
You don't get those without a copyright.
Re: (Score:1)
To expand on this:
AI cannot hold a copyright
and even if it could, she would not hold the copyright.
Re: (Score:2)
To explain like you're five: you need a be a legal person to hold copyright. So you can simply be a person who holds rights to something AI created. Who can then pay royalties on whatever is made off things AI created to another person.
You don't even need to be a human for this. Corporation can do the holding the rights-part.
This isn't even new or interesting. Things like Vocaloid existed since what, 2007?
Re: (Score:1)
How is she codependent if she already left the relationship?
Brilliant! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Made a 5000 Boring Ape pictures of Grimes (Score:3)
Send out an email to collect the NFT royalties but her management said she was talking about her music.
5 minutes of my life wasted on creating those monkey images.
Bummer!
Crowdsourced Zero-Effort Income Streams (Score:1)
Grimey (Score:3)
When I hear Grimes all I think about is, "What's this? 'Extremely high voltage.' Well, I don't need safety gloves, because I'm Homer Simp-!"
Rest in peace, Grimey old pal.
Re: (Score:2)
I think I'm going to refer to her as Gri Mes.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're lucky you'll never think about her again.
Umm.. no. (Score:2)
Grimes makes the absolute worst music I've ever heard in my life.
There is no AI that can fix that.
Re:Umm.. no. (Score:4, Funny)
Grimes makes the absolute worst music I've ever heard in my life.
Have you ever listened to Yoko Ono?
Re: (Score:2)
I'd give you an insightful for this, but they just expired. I'm listening to Grimes right now, "shinigami eyes" and "player of games".
Her voice in both is so processed that I'd be surprised that anybody could pin down that her voice was used by the AI.
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you listening?
Re: (Score:2)
So I could give an honest review of what I think of her music? Especially in the context of AI art?
More listenable than Yoko, but so autotuned and what I'd call "behind the music" rather than "in front of the music", so much so that it's practically background. Should be very easy to replicate using AI stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
Forgot to mention: I ended up listening to a total of 4 of her songs, which should give me a good idea of her general music, that I didn't just hit two bad ones or whatever. Some artists can actually sound very different song to song. Kimbra has more variations between songs in my opinion(I'm hardly a music critic though)
Re: (Score:1)
I think the band with the most variety is Ween. Check out their "Shinola" or "Chocolate & Cheese" albums.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with this assessment. Not having heard her before I listened to a handful of songs. Her song structures are definitely more creative than most chart pop, but her voice is so heavily processed that the overall effect is ethereal. Plenty of people seem to enjoy her music, for me it lacks character and relistenability.
Grimes who? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, it's AI related and AI is currently the hot shit in all things computer (or so I heard...), so that's probably why it's here, along with all the other AI stories.
It's just yet again one of those things where nobody knows just how much it's gonna take off. It could be the next hot thing or it could be the next Metaverse, an overhyped, overblown, overheated piece of crap nobody gives a fuck about in the end.
If you can't win, join them. (Score:2)
Since she can't keep these things from happening anyway, she can as well try to get her cut.
Who? (Score:2)
D-List news, stuff that doesn't matter.
ROTFLMAO (Score:2)
"Use my voice, as long as I get the money"
They ALL do that!
AI (Score:1)
Missing a bit on her name... (Score:2)