When the days splashed with natural sunlight that's when I felt the most happy. My brain was wired to be in tune with nature so every time the weather permitted my mood would change. Foggy days brought foggy hope and rainy days varied,both in sickness and in health my mood would also change, swinging back and swinging forth; I was sea sick but still here I went with the motions of swinging. I was ever changing from the light to the darkness, it's like one side was pulling me and the other side was going the opposite direction stretching out my extremities and testing my core strength, who was I? Strong or weak? My mind would argue constantly with itself while I was sitting in the background screaming for them to just decide who I would be today. Everyone else ran away because I pushed them far and at times I was too disgusted to call out to God even though he knew the disaster I was already. Sometimes I looked at the scars on my arms and felt like I wanted to cut both of my arms off to hide my "crazy" sometimes I felt like that word was super-glued to my skin and I felt like the mess in my room resembled the mess in my life and I wanted the sun to always shine so I could too and I wanted summer's warmth and I wanted the calmness of the hot season breeze. I totally had an epiphany right now, that I was hurting so bad inside but I was not going full blown maniac this time, I felt it inside though chaos swishing to the ventricles in my heart telling me to act cured and well and to do something extraordinary, the sun was shining I needed to as well...but I was fury anyway with just existing I am still amazing, I am breathing even in darkness I am an eagle a queen a ball of hope for my friends a beautiful role model for my daughter a warrior and I will mend my wings I love this disease of borderline personality disorder I hate it. My thoughts are short, they don't run together smoothly like a well thought out painting. I am in drunkenness to the world, but without my borderline mind I am not sober either.
The Illusion of Creativity
AI-generated music is often marketed as “artistic” or “educational.” But what does it really teach?
- That style can be replicated without understanding.
- That emotion can be simulated without feeling.
- That effort can be bypassed with a prompt.
For young creators, this sets a dangerous precedent. Why learn to play guitar when an algorithm can do it faster? Why study harmony when AI can generate chord progressions in seconds? The risk isn’t just laziness — it’s the loss of depth, discipline, and the tactile joy of creation.
I have listened to several AI-generated music covers. My initial reaction was one of considerable impressiveness, particularly regarding the reimagining of classic pop hits in diverse genres with novel arrangements. Here is one good example a-ha — Take On Me
However, after engaging with several such Ai generated song covers, a sense of emotional detachment emerged, attributable to the perceived absence of human artistry and genuine sentiment, resulting in a technically flawless yet ultimately soulless auditory experience.
Copyright in Crisis
What does the copyright law say about AI generated music, especially in field of music covers. Who is liable for copyright in this case, AI developers, people who used AI to generate music or people who published it on music platforms?
Recent lawsuits show that the music industry is pushing back hard:
- Universal, Sony, and Warner sued AI music platforms Suno and Udio in 2024 for allegedly training their models on copyrighted songs without permission Ars Technica The Lyon Firm.
- They’re seeking up to $150,000 per infringed song, arguing that the AI outputs resemble famous tracks and voices (e.g., Mariah Carey, Michael Jackson).
- These lawsuits target the developers of the AI tools — but they raise broader questions:The legal gray area is training data. Courts haven’t yet ruled definitively on whether using copyrighted songs to train AI counts as infringement or fair use Sites at USC.
But who’s liable?
Role | Legal Risk | Why |
AI Developers | ✅ High | For training on copyrighted material without licenses. |
Users | ⚠️ Moderate | If they intentionally recreate protected works. |
Publishers/Platforms | ✅ High | For distributing infringing content. |
The grey area lies in training data. Courts haven’t yet ruled definitively on whether using copyrighted songs to train AI counts as infringement or fair use. Meanwhile, AI-generated works themselves aren’t eligible for copyright unless a human provides substantial creative input — leaving them in legal limbo.
The Educational Mirage
Some argue that AI music helps people learn genres, production styles, or vocal techniques. But this “education” often lacks context. It’s like learning to paint by watching a printer — technically impressive, but creatively hollow.
True musical education involves:
- Struggle and iteration: Learning through mistakes.
- Emotional connection: Expressing what words can’t.
- Cultural lineage: Understanding the roots of sound.
AI shortcuts bypass all of this. And in doing so, they risk flattening the rich terrain of human creativity into a sterile landscape of algorithmic mimicry.
Why This Fight Matters
This isn’t just about music. It’s about the future of art, storytelling, and human expression. If we allow machines to dominate creative spaces, we risk turning culture into content — optimized, monetized, and devoid of soul.
We must ask: Do we want a world where art is made by machines, or one where machines help humans make better art?
5 Key Takeaways
- AI-generated music blurs the line between innovation and erosion in the creative arts
- AI-generated music raises questions about copyright, culture, education, and artistic expression
- AI-generated music can replicate style without understanding, simulate emotion without feeling, and bypass effort with a prompt
- AI-generated music sets a dangerous precedent for young creators by potentially leading to a loss of depth, discipline, and joy of creation
Trending Topics
Trending Stories
