Thanks to one of my previous roommates, I am hooked on The Bachelor. I'm still a fairly new viewer to the popular dating show, only having started watching when Ben's season aired, but it's definitely an every Monday guilty pleasure of mine. It's easy to get caught up in the shows drama, cheering on your favorite contestants and getting sad when one of them is sent home. This week was no exception and it was arguably one of the craziest episodes I've seen yet. But between all of the sent home while on a date drama, there's been one contestant throughout this entire season that has continuously stood out to me, one that I think is an important example of how important immigrating to the United States has become for some. In this weeks episode Kristina Schulman, 24, shared her story while on a one-on-one date with Nick of how she became an orphan in Russia at age five and came to the United States. She was adopted by American parents at age 12, allowing her to gain citizenship into the U.S. having a chance at a better life. Schulman talks about how hard it was making the decision to leave the family and friends she had made while in the orphanage, but it was either leaving and having an opportunity at a better life, or staying and running the high risk of getting into prostitution as a means for money and survival, something that is all too common. With controversial Super Bowl commercials like 84 Lumber airing and President Trumps travel ban, her story came out on the show at such a critical time. It reminded me of how important giving people a chance is. According to the UN Refugee Agency the global forced displacement hit an all time record high in 2015, well over 65 million. Watching Kristina's story I am reminded of how ignorant being blessed to have grown up in the United States has made us. We're constantly forgetting that not everyone is as lucky to grow up in a country full of opportunities and freedom. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if I was a refugee from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, maybe even Russia, or another poverty or war stricken country looking for an opportunity at a better life, I would want to come to the United States too. And who are we to tell them no?
Recommended for you
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
Best of Politics and Activism![Jenna Pizzi and her mom smiling by a waterfront with a historic ship in the background.]()
![Cristina Yang and Meredith Grey in scrubs sit against a wall, smiling and enjoying a break.]()
![Woman in field with a red heart-shaped balloon under a colorful sky.]()
