Weekly Column: Is the Music Industry the Most Likely to Adopt AI Tools

In this week’s column, California Sports Lawyer® CEO, Founder, and Managing Attorney Jeremy M. Evans writes about the increasing use of artificial intelligence in music creation, production, and editing.

Generative AI in any field can help with training and improvement, but it should not be the crutch to success.

You can read the full column below. (Past columns can be found, here).

In the film and television business, recreations of people with artificial intelligence (“AI”) and Computer-generated imagery (“CGI”) is regulated by SAG-AFTRA union agreements and current technological limitations. In the writing world, authors like other creators seek to avoid using AI to create as it takes away from the ability to think and write something new without input from an ever-expanding knowledge computer like generative AI. In the business, legal, and corporate spaces, AI is being adopted in stages with a focus on ethics and responsibility. However, there is no guarantee that any limitations on AI will be fruitful, followed, or are necessary.

The psychology of using artificial intelligence is not talked about enough. When someone relies on AI to develop something or be creative, it takes away from the ability of someone to think, respond, problem solve, and be human. Overuse can take away the one thing that separates us from animals—the ability to think beyond God-created instinct and repetition.

It is also true that AI can help someone without skill or training in graphic design to create images or logos for their business. AI can also synthesize data. AI can also provide an opinion or answers to research questions. It can be a starting place or where work is edited, but with short-term and long-term efficacy a major concern.

The music industry is a tricky place to use AI. However, AI may end up being the most utilized in the music industry. The music industry is a space that can probably benefit most from AI use. The question is whether such use should be regulated to protect artists, producers, and the public? Or is technology and AI in human hands the same as consumers choosing between electric, hydrogen, or gas engines when purchasing or leasing a vehicle?

It is of note that AI music company Suno hired a former Atlantic Records executive to be their chief music officer. According to the Hollywood Reporter and the company announcement, Suno and the former Atlantic Records executive have been working together that “will guide how Suno’s AI-powered tools are integrated into the process of songmaking, helping to empower creators of all skill-levels to make music, expand creative expression and unlock new experiences between artists and fans.” It seems the work is already being done to integrate AI tools in the music business.

Musical talents are the want of many, but commercially few have them to succeed. What AI does is allow people with lesser skills, talent, or time to develop the same the ability to create music. AI can also add a repertoire of skills and services to a very talented artist. It is a double-edged sword between talent and technology. The answer may be in the details of regulation, disclosure, and awards-categories specific to talents used. It is fun to create music, but regulation through copyright and tort law, e.g., name, image, and likeness, is essential and must be top of mind for development and progress in the music industry. Generative AI in any field can help with training and improvement, but it should not be the crutch to success.

About Jeremy M. Evans:

Jeremy M. Evans is the Chief Entrepreneur Officer, Founder & Managing Attorney at California Sports Lawyer®, representing entertainment, media, and sports clients in contractual, intellectual property, and dealmaking matters. Evans is an award-winning attorney and industry leader based in Los Angeles and Newport Beach, California. He can be reached at Jeremy@CSLlegal.com. www.CSLlegal.com.