From the Rolling
Stone cover of topless Janet Jackson in 1993, to the Vanity Fair’'s 2008 provocative cover of Miley Cyrus photographed in nothing but
a sheet at age 15, Kim Kardashian has managed to “break the internet” with her
provocative images on the 2014 winter cover of Paper Magazine. Her images are some of the most outrageous magazine covers of all time. Although the dual covers did not
literally break the internet, these shocking photographs deliver messages that are leaving the public speechless.
For those of you who have not yet seen the images of Kardashian,
shot by famous French photographer, Jean-Paul Goude, they are surprising to most. The first photo exposes her lathered in body oil
showing off her highly-known bare behind; the other shows Kim popping a
bottle of champagne as it sprays into a champagne glass she is balancing on her
derriere. Photographer Goude references Kardashian’s photos to his earlier work
known as, “Champagne Incident.”
It is not news to anyone that Kim K’s behind is famous for being that big; however, word on the streets is the photos were extremely
photoshopped. Although Jean-Paul Goude has a long history of photoshopping
and manipulating images with props and different techniques, his shots of Kim K
are a re-creation of his work in 1976 of a smiling, nude, black woman
performing the champagne trick, which is exactly what Goude achieved with these
images of Kardashian. Her performance of the champagne trick on Paper magazine’s cover is truly an
impossible act to attempt, however Goude is known
for achieving it.
When the magazine was released featuring the provocative
images of not so shy Kim K, she tweeted
the pictures with the humorous caption, “And they say I didn’t have a
talent… try balancing a champagne glass on your ass LOL.” Soon after, her husband, Kanye West, posted the same images with the caption “#ALLDAY.”
Luckily
for us, the internet did not actually break, but the media’s response to Paper’s cover has been more of a comical
take on Kardashian and the numerous re-enactments of the photo showing off her bare
behind, and Kris Jenner’s request of poster size orders of the
photos upon their release.
The full story of Kim K in Paper Magazine has been released, and is titled, “No Filter: An
Afternoon With Kim Kardashian,” featuring the rest of the images from the
photo shoot. Honestly, as outrageous as these photographs are, did you really expect anything less from Kim Kardashian?
Welcome back
Sign in to comment to your favorite stories, participate in your community and interact with your friends
or
LOG IN WITH FACEBOOKNo account? Create one
This article has not been reviewed by Odyssey HQ and solely reflects the ideas and opinions of the creator.
StableDiffusion
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 Entertainment![Cristina Yang and Meredith Grey in scrubs sit against a wall, smiling and enjoying a break.]()
![Towson University]()
![Woman in field with a red heart-shaped balloon under a colorful sky.]()
