Get the ECT News Network Weekly Newsletter » View Sample | Subscribe
Welcome Guest | Sign In
E-Commerce Times TechNewsWorld CRM Buyer LinuxInsider

TechNewsWorld Talkback

ECT News Community   »   TechNewsWorld Talkback   »   Re: Google's Magenta AI Tickles the Ivories

Re: Google's Magenta AI Tickles the Ivories
Posted by: Richard Adhikari 2016-06-06 20:19:28
See Full Story

The Google Brain team on Wednesday released a tune created by machine intelligence.
The composition is part of Project Magenta, which seeks to boost the capabilities of machine intelligence to create art and music. Among other things, the Magenta team is developing algorithms that enable artificial intelligence systems to learn how to create compelling art and music on their own. Magenta also seeks to build a community of artists, coders and machine learning researchers.

Re: Google's Magenta AI Tickles the Ivories
Posted by: dolomuse 2016-12-02 10:04:59 In reply to: Richard Adhikari
With respect to music, a second issue, beyond the status of AI as an author/creator is in play here.

In understanding music as an abstract language, it becomes apparent that there are very limited melodic and harmonic combinations possible within a 7 note (modal), 5 note (pentatonic), or 12 note (chromatic) system. An analogy could be the limited number of words and sentences possible with a 5, 7, or 12 letter alphabet.

Within this limited musical system, every possible melodic and harmonic fragment/combination has been conceived before, used in varying contexts - historically and stylistically. Ever expanding databases of public domain musical fragments may eventually be catalogued, readily accessible and used in legal defense against claims of copyright infringement. Uniqueness of integrated musical context may ultimately be the deciding factor in determining ownership/infringement vs. public domain variation.

With the existence of immense databases of worldwide historical (public domain) musical fragments, it should not be difficult to find prior examples of any basic melodic/harmonic fragments being used in the generative variation processes of AI, preexisting in the public domain.

“Copyright law excludes protection for works that are produced by purely mechanized or random processes, so the question comes down to the extent of human involvement, and whether a person can be credited with any of the creative processes that produced the work.” I wonder how the court would define ‘creative involvement’. Would this idea be extended to creative editing and arrangement of randomly generated AI fragments?

And in practice, will a distinction emerge between human creative involvement as musical compositor (constructing a final sonic 'image' by combining layers of previously-created/computer generated material) vs composer - as poles in a 'creative continuum' between arranging/editing and innovative exploration/expression?
Jump to:
Would you license your personal data to advertising platforms if you were paid directly for it?
Yes -- So much of my personal data is already in the hands of advertisers anyhow; I may as well be paid for it.
Possibly -- It depends how much I would be compensated and how the data I authorize to share would be used and protected.
No -- I would not sell my personal data at any price.