We live in a world that whatever you do is under a microscope. One of my favorite sayings is "Never let your good deeds be evil spoken of", but in today's time that seems impossible. People are so quick to assume before asking what's really going , or how will it benefit the greater good. Recently Chrisette Michelle was one of many celebrities to come under fire for her decision to perform at the inaugural ball of Donald Trump. She was quoted saying "If we're artists, if we're supposed to be the people who shake the world with our art, then we've got to stand on stages where we're uncomfortable, and tell our truth," Michele said. At first I gave her the side eye for her decision to perform at this event, this put me in the same judgmental boat as the rest of the world. What most people don't understand your non verbals make more noise than your verbals. So while many people including myself did not watch the coverage of the inaugural ball , Chrisette made a bold statement with her outfit. Her skirt depicted what is going on in America from the black lives matter movement to African-Americans being lynched, she was trying to represent the population of African-Americans she wants to be the voice. Even though she didn't get a chance to speak to the president she spoke to the masses millions of people saw her statement. She's not the only celebrity to come under fire for talking or meeting with Donald Trump but since he's our president we have to work with what we have. We as human need understand that we can't persecute people for making the decisions that they want to make. If we took into account the decisions that we make , and how it would effect others I think we will be less judgmental towards other people. We can't go off of what other people feel ,believe ,or think because it may be bias without questioning their motives. We need to start first thinking for ourselves and secondly don't be so quick to jump to judgment because of others opinions.
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 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.]()
