At what point does the line get crossed with AI? Who/what judges where that line should be?

If an artist uses AI in BiaB to create the main vocal melody and a real singer sings it on the record, is that crossing "the line"?

If an artist uses a program to automix their song, but all the tracks were recorded without AI assistance, does that cross the line? What if it's mastered with AI?

If an artist uses Google to come up with a rhyme or three and they take its (Gemini) recommendation, does that cross the line?

 

Before anyone calls AI music "slop", have a listen to this. If you can do better than this, then you have every right to call it "slop":

 

If I were some top 3 AI owner I'd sit down the other guys and try to make a deal that music is off limits for AI, delete all trained DBs and never try to make them again. Not because AI can't make good music, just because creating stuff is a large chunk of what makes us human. I mean leave something to humans only, just for fucking fun. It's not that someone will starve if we don't automate the shit out of it. It's like selling all jigsaw puzzles pre-assembled, what fun is in that.

 

Even if it turns out true, like some comments here say, that it will be very difficult for Bandcamp to police this, I still think it's really GREAT that Bandcamp is going out of their way to make a very public statement they don't want this slop on their website! Saying "We don't want you" is a good start.

 

Good

 

It's called slop because it's low effort product from human side, not low quality AI output.

 

The problem I "predict" will happen is a only low amount of "offending" tracks will get reported. The only times I end up on Bandcamp website is because someone has linked me their page for its content.

Do people actually just "surf" Bandcamp and listen to stuff randomly?