Suno & Udio To RIAA: Your Music Is Copyrighted, You Can’t Copyright Styles

AI music generators Suno and Udio responded to the lawsuits filed by the major recording labels, arguing that their platforms are tools for making new, original music that “didn’t and often couldn’t previously exist.”

“Those genres and styles — the recognizable sounds of opera, or jazz, or rap music — are not something that anyone owns,” the companies said. “Our intellectual property laws have always been carefully calibrated to avoid allowing anyone to monopolize a form of artistic expression, whether a sonnet or a pop song. IP rights can attach to a particular recorded rendition of a song in one of those genres or styles. But not to the genre or style itself.” TorrentFreak reports: “[The labels] frame their concern as one about ‘copies’ of their recordings made in the process of developing the technology — that is, copies never heard or seen by anyone, made solely to analyze the sonic and stylistic patterns of the universe of pre-existing musical expression. But what the major record labels really don’t want is competition.” The labels’ position is that any competition must be legal, and the AI companies state quite clearly that the law permits the use of copyrighted works in these circumstances. Suno and Udio also make it clear that snippets of copyrighted music aren’t stored as a library of pre-existing content in the neural networks of their AI models, “outputting a collage of ‘samples’ stitched together from existing recordings” when prompted by users.

“[The neural networks were] constructed by showing the program tens of millions of instances of different kinds of recordings,” Suno explains. “From analyzing their constitutive elements, the model derived a staggeringly complex collection of statistical insights about the auditory characteristics of those recordings — what types of sounds tend to appear in which kinds of music; what the shape of a pop song tends to look like; how the drum beat typically varies from country to rock to hip-hop; what the guitar tone tends to sound like in those different genres; and so on.” These models are vast stores, not of copyrighted music, the defendants say, but information about what musical styles consist of, and it’s from that information new music is made.

Most copyright lawsuits in the music industry are about reproduction and public distribution of identified copyright works, but that’s certainly not the case here. “The Complaint explicitly disavows any contention that any output ever generated by Udio has infringed their rights. While it includes a variety of examples of outputs that allegedly resemble certain pre-existing songs, the Complaint goes out of its way to say that it is not alleging that those outputs constitute actionable copyright infringement.” With Udio declaring that, as a matter of law, “that key point makes all the difference,” Suno’s conclusion is served raw. “That concession will ultimately prove fatal to Plaintiffs’ claims. It is fair use under copyright law to make a copy of a protected work as part of a back-end technological process, invisible to the public, in the service of creating an ultimately non-infringing new product.” Noting that Congress enacted the first copyright law in 1791, Suno says that in the 233 years since, not a single case has ever reached a contrary conclusion.

In addition to addressing allegations unique to their individual cases, the AI companies accuse the labels of various types of anti-competitive behavior. Imposing conditions to prevent streaming services obtaining licensed music from smaller labels at lower rates, seeking to impose a “no AI” policy on licensees, to claims that they “may have responded to outreach from potential commercial counterparties by engaging in one or more concerted refusals to deal.” The defendants say this type of behavior is fueled by the labels’ dominant control of copyrighted works and by extension, the overall market. Here, however, ownership of copyrighted music is trumped by the existence and knowledge of musical styles, over which nobody can claim ownership or seek to control. “No one owns musical styles. Developing a tool to empower many more people to create music, by scrupulously analyzing what the building blocks of different styles consist of, is a quintessential fair use under longstanding and unbroken copyright doctrine. “Plaintiffs’ contrary vision is fundamentally inconsistent with the law and its underlying values.” You can read Suno and Udio’s answers to the RIAA’s lawsuits here (PDF) and here (PDF).

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

iPad Sales Help ‘Bail Out’ Apple Amid a Continued iPhone Slide

Apple reported a new June quarter revenue record of $85.8 billion, up 5 percent from a year ago, fueled largely by new iPad sales. iPad “saw the biggest category increase for the quarter, up from $5.8 billion to $7.2 billion year-over-year,” reports TechCrunch. It helped counter slowed iPhone revenue, “which dropped from $39.7 billion to $39.3 billion year-on-year.” From the report: In spite of a drop for the quarter, iPhone remained Apple’s most important category by a wide margin, followed by service, which includes software offerings like iCloud, Apple TV+ and Apple Music. That category continued to grow, up to $24.2 billion from $21.2 billion over the same three-month period last year. Much of the iPhone slowdown can be attributed to the greater China region. Overall, the region dropped from $15.8 billion to $14.7 billion for the quarter. Canalys figures from last week show a marked decline in iPhone sales, down 6.7% from 10.4 million to 9.7 million for the quarter, Reuters reported.

The drop in Apple’s third-largest region (behind the Americas and Europe) had a clear impact on the company’s bottom line. The company aggressively discounted iPhone prices in China starting in May, as competition intensified from domestic rivals. The strategy resulted in strong iPhone sales that month, up close to 40% from a year prior. […] Q3 marked the second consecutive quarter decline for global iPhone sales. The news puts additional pressure on the generative AI strategy that the company laid out at WWDC in June.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Called Out For ‘Worker Surveillance’

Microsoft Dynamics 365’s “field service management” tools enable employers to monitor mobile workers via smartphone apps — “allegedly to the detriment of their autonomy and dignity,” reports The Register. From the report: According to a probe by Cracked Labs – an Austrian nonprofit research group — the software is part of a broader set of applications that disempowers workers through algorithmic management. The case study [PDF] summarizes how employers in Europe actually use software and smartphone apps to oversee field technicians, home workers, and cleaning staff. It’s part of a larger ongoing project helmed by the group called “Surveillance and Digital Control at Work,” which includes contributions from AlgorithmWatch; Jeremias Adams-Prassl, professor of law at the University of Oxford; and trade unions UNI Europa and GPA.

Mobile maintenance workers used to have a substantial amount of autonomy when they were equipped with basic mobile phones, the study notes, but smartphones have allowed employers to track what mobile workers do, when they do it, where they are, and gather many other data points. The effect of this monitoring, the report argues, means diminished worker discretion, autonomy, and sense of purpose due to task-based micromanagement. The shift has also accelerated and intensified work stress, with little respect to workers’ capabilities, differences in lifestyle, and job practices. “Field service workers travel to multiple locations servicing different products every day,” a Microsoft spokesperson told The Register. “Dynamics 365 Field Service and its Copilot capabilities are designed to help field service workers schedule, plan and provide onsite maintenance and repairs in the right location, on time with the right information and workplace guides on their device to complete their jobs.”

“Dynamics 365 Field Service does not use AI to recommend individual workers for specific jobs based on previous performance. Dynamics 365 Field Service was developed in accordance with our Responsible AI principles and data privacy statement. Customers are solely responsible for using Dynamics 365 Field Service in compliance with all applicable laws, including laws relating to accessing individual employee analytics and monitoring.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

US Progressives Push For Nvidia Antitrust Investigation

Progressive groups and Senator Elizabeth Warren are urging the Department of Justice to investigate Nvidia for potential antitrust violations due to its dominant position in the AI chip market. The groups criticize Nvidia’s bundling of software and hardware, claiming it stifles innovation and locks in customers. Reuters reports: Demand Progress and nine other groups wrote a letter (PDF) this week, opens new tab urging Department of Justice antitrust chief Jonathan Kanter to probe business practices at Nvidia, whose market value hit $3 trillion this summer on demand for chips able to run the complex models behind generative AI. The groups, which oppose monopolies and promote government oversight of tech companies, among other issues, took aim at Nvidia’s bundling of software and hardware, a practice that French antitrust enforcers have flagged as they prepare to bring charges.

“This aggressively proprietary approach, which is strongly contrary to industry norms about collaboration and interoperability, acts to lock in customers and stifles innovation,” the groups wrote. Nvidia has roughly 80% of the AI chip market, including the custom AI processors made by cloud computing companies like Google, Microsoft and Amazon.com. The chips made by the cloud giants are not available for sale themselves but typically rented through each platform. A spokesperson for Nvidia said: “Regulators need not be concerned, as we scrupulously adhere to all laws and ensure that NVIDIA is openly available in every cloud and on-prem for every enterprise. We’ll continue to support aspiring innovators in every industry and market and are happy to provide any information regulators need.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.