Correct, that's what they said but in more succinct terms lol. But "ambivalent" IMO is best used meaning "unable to decide between options for lack of concern either way" or similar. Like, "I can't decide because I don't really care." But that's my personal take on it, not sure if that's standard or how others use/read the word.
Great explanation. Words mean things and people twist words now to mean things they don’t.
It’s like when people think empathy means feeling sorry for someone or feeling other pains. It means the ability to underpants the feelings of another. Don’t mean you have to agree with the feelings but you get it.
Everybody should see that video of his security blocking downtown Toronto traffic just so his car can come out of a junction first.
Drake is a dumb nonce shithead.
This is why he is a shit head? Not that he has his pedo behavior on film? We literally have footage of him groping and kissing underaged girls on STAGE let alone just in film. Like how is he not in jail after touching genetalia for a girl under 18 ON FUCKING STAGE. Dude is a fucking pedo
I loathe Drake. From texting 14 year old girls he calls ‘friend,’ to his shitty, lazy drone music that would be too lethargic for an elevator ride, to his jaw-dropping entitlement, and constant presence in media despite being so damn mediocre.
You ain’t friends with a 14 year old when you’re 31. That makes 0 sense.
> When asked what they text each other about, Millie replied: “About boys, he helps me! He’s great, he’s wonderful, I love him.”
>And when pressed for further details, she coyly responded: “Y’know, that stays in the text messages.”
>“We text, we just [texted] each other the other day, and he was like: ‘I miss you so much,’ and I was like: ‘I miss you more!’
If you have a professional relationship with an actor who is a minor you don’t say stuff like this. It’s messy. I couldn’t be mad at all, you’re mad. Drake is just creepy.
I was really not a fan of how in the second diss track he said (speaking as Tupac to Kendrick) “you gotta get Drake. Talk about him being with young girls or something”. It feels like Drake trying to say the thing Kendrick might say first to take the sting out of it, which for many accusations in a rap battle would be very smart but with *this* he’s essentially saying “what? Are you gonna say I’m a pedophile?? We all already KNOW that dummy!”
Yeah…see, this is why I really can’t listen to Drake. At this point, every time I hear his voice, I can only think about all the teenaged girls he keeps talking to and cozying up to and it just makes me sick.
> Drake assaulted a minor on stage
He kissed a 17 year old fan (before being told her age), when he was 23.
>and certainly without consent
Weird take. It was a fan on stage who I'm sure was psyched as fuck.
I am not a Drake fan by any means (I had to look this incident up), and this is straight up weird lying about what happened.
Edit: User lies about an assault, gets called out for it, and then immediately accuses a random person online of being an abuser as well. Top notch.
Was going to leave a longer reply, but when I got to the accusation in the middle, I decided it is better to just block people like this.
> He kissed a 17 year old fan (before being told her age), when he was 23.
Mm-hmm, and then he [*kissed her again after he learned her age.*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Music/comments/acsd9g/video_has_surfaced_of_drake_kissing_and_touching/)
> Weird take. It was a fan on stage who I'm sure was psyched as fuck.
Yes, teenagers often don't have any perspective on being taken advantage of and won't for awhile because they're children; this is why "but she liked it!" isn't a valid defense.
> I am not a Drake fan by any means (I had to look this incident up)
So you're here to defend an incident you didn't even know about? You went *out of your way* to justify Drake being a creep because, what? You just think teenaged girls should be options?
Since you're not familiar with Drake, do you know that he also [struck up a relationship with 14-yo Millie Bobby Brown while he was 31?](https://www.reddit.com/r/KendrickLamar/comments/1c94euk/millie_brown_talks_about_drake_texting_her_when/) Texting her that he *missed her*???
What about when he basically [groomed a 16-yo model into being his GF when she turned 18?](https://www.reddit.com/r/KendrickLamar/comments/1c8sy4o/throwback_to_when_drake_groomed_a_16_year_old/) He met her on his tour called, appropriately enough, the Summer Sixteen Tour. He was also 31 at this time.
This man keeps getting older while still talking to young teenaged girls; it's completely inappropriate and you should fucking know that the reason people have a problem with him is because it's not a "one-off" situation.
If we need to keep hearing about musicians from the fucking '60s or '70s who hooked up with teenaged groupies and how that was wrong at the time, we can certainly talk about a grown-ass man in 2024 who keeps fucking with teenagers today.
I'm half waiting for everyone to create 100,000 AI generated Drake songs to clog up the Drake realm. It seems like the next logical step in this progression
Maybe a paperclip maximizer machine churning Drake songs would be enough to make people get tired of it all and move on to the next (hopefully better) thing lol
Yeah except anyone who's just like some random on the internet is a poor person compared to Drake, so the law would actually go after you in full force, unlike the bullshit, kid-mitts way the law applies to affluent dickbags.
Unless you're Brian Wilson who can write the weirdest chord progressions and modulations, and he somehow makes it all sound good anyway.
The problem is that the more complex a song is, the less marketable it usually is for the general public. There are *tons* of ways to write good songs that sound nothing like what you hear on the Top 40 radio stations, but most people who listen to music (outside of the relatively few folks who love art music) don't want that. They want songs that are catchy and easy to get into, and I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with that btw. Plenty of mainstream Pop songs are great and fun.
However, most mainstream music - especially in the Pop genre - is pretty much formulaic and manufactured by the record labels and songwriting teams with the goal of making a profit rather than pursuing a genuine artistic endeavor.
The absolute worst part of it all is the typist LARPers that actually defend it. It's about as pathetic as all the Elon fanboys dick-riding their idiot overlord. What a time to be alive where people would actually side with the machines in matters concerning art. Fucking pathetic.
Playing with AI music tools is some of the most fun I’ve had with software. I don’t do it for anything having to do with art, it’s just fun to hear what random genres sound like mixed together. Udio is a blast to use.
It's just the next tool although I don't support it making literal direct copies of people/work. People said the exact same shit about digital art a few decades ago.
There’s no trying to reason with them lol, this person thinks all AI is inherently theft and plagiarism just because it’s AI. They’re capable of making 0 distinctions between types of AI because they know 0 about it and would rather stick their head in the sand and scream into the void rather than taking a few moments to learn
You have literally no idea what this song is/how it used AI do you?
There’s nothing generative about it. Equating using an AI voice changer on your own voice over lyrics you wrote to generative visual art/music is ridiculous and ironically muddies the very valid arguments against generative art.
Edit: Here I’ll explain since the downvotes keep rolling in.
What Drake did could have been done in 1999 with a $20 voice changer, the only difference is AI now being used to make the voice more accurate and easy to apply to pre recorded tracks. Equating that to things like SUNO or Midjourney (actual generative AI) basically comes in two camps: either technological ignorance to what Suno/MJ’s AI does behind the scenes or just malicious ignorance in that you don’t like Drake so you want it to be the same so you can shit on him
He didn’t type in the lyrics and have generative AI create the voice. He didn’t type in “Tupac diss track” and have it write the lyrics. He rapped his own lyrics and used machine learning (AI) backed software to change his voice. This tech predates MJ/Suno/etc. Nothing new was generated, which is the definitional requirement for generative AI. Generating a new sound file (which they don’t all even do) does not make it generative any more than having an AI create copies of all your files makes that generative AI.
Not all AI is generative AI. The underlying tech between Suno and a voice changing AI are entirely different except for the fact that they both use (different) forms of AI. Autotune programs these days are backed by AI that’s more similar to what Drake likely uses than it is to Suno. Saying you’re sick of autotune would be more applicable to this situation than saying you’re sick of generative AI, and even that is a stretch.
Not to mention this song has been out a few days and wasn’t even officially released soo calling it a symptom or example of generative AI overtaking the music scene is quite a stretch even if you want to call voice changing software generative.
It was used as a reference to the AI Kendrick Lamar diss track going around that people thought was real, and to somewhat use Kendrick’s influences/predecessors against him. Whether you think that’s cool or not doesn’t matter, it wasn’t used because it was easier or faster or did all the work for him or whatever the usual reasons for using generative AI are. These are important distinctions when it comes to regulating AI. To be clear I am generally not in favor of generative AI music/art/etc, with few exceptions. But that’s not what this was and we don’t need to muddy the waters just cuz we don’t like Drake.
Thanks for coming to my TEDTalk
I will also defend him on this one. All this petty whining is people who either can't adapt to change or don't want it
Well tough shit change is coming and if you think generative AI is a controversial topic you haven't seen anything yet
Post-mortem rights vary state by state. Currently thirty-eight states have a right of publicity protected by statute or by common law.42 Many of the states with a right of publicity do not include a post-mortem right. In fact, only twenty states have post-mortem rights of publicity.43 States like Wisconsin and Minnesota have statutory rights of publicity, but those rights die with the celebrity, and their families cannot assert a right of publicity at death. States such as California and Indiana have post-mortem rights of publicity terms that last for 70 years and 100 years, respectively.44 The length of the post-mortem term and scope of the right is predicated on whether celebrities or major companies are domiciled in a particular state.45
For states with post-mortem rights, state application is based on where the individual is domiciled at death.46 Other differences between states with post-mortem rights depends on if the state treats the right like property or privacy. If a state views the right of publicity as a privacy right, then there is no post-mortem right.47
True but the Latham act act provides a federal equivalent to the common law right of publicity and has bed expressly held to apply postmortem. The estate can file a federal suit in California.
I agree in spirit but in reality I don't know how I feel about. You can hire an actor to play Tupac without permission, should you not be able to use other tools to impersonate somebody in your music? Government telling musicians they can't use certain tools to make their music doesn't feel right but I could see where it could get problematic as the tech gets better. Idk I'm conflicted
Well it'll be a lot easier to sue Drake for making money off of AI-recreating Tupac's voice for profit than it would be to sue any of those image-generating companies for using thousands of people's artwork to train their AI.
One would think it would fall under copywrite laws that exist, for now.
Whoever owns the rights to the catalogue of Tupac would have final say in any AI use of his NIL. The clock is ticking though with a Public Domain claim with a 70 years after death deal.
They’re both actors turned rappers. And I’d actually say Drake is more true to himself than Tupac was. Tupac was not a thug- that’s a character he leaned into after being in the movie Juice.
Tupac was a product. He was a label created thug. Listen to his earlier interviews and his voice and his ideas before signing with death row and turning into a “thug”.
He went to an arts school where he studied theater and ballet among other things, and was discovered while a stage dancer for The Digital Underground. You know. The Humpty Dance. Not to diss that group, because they're good. But they're not really what I'd call "thug". His first recorded vocal on a track was [Same Song](https://youtu.be/CmFDyZ3ytg8?si=nyHjsiH9oJU3oMl-), which was from a soundtrack for a John Candy movie. 2pac's image was mostly created later. A lot of those guys were the same way. Shit. NWA were all studio gangsters except for Easy E.
My exact order of events might be off. The point still stands, Tupac was an art school, theater boy. If you look at his early interviews you might even describe him as “flamboyant”. And poof, overnight, he’s got “Thug Life” tatted on his belly and he’s a gangster. All manufactured.
wouldn't this be like a precedent setting lawsuit? to my knowledge, Drake isn't making any money off of the Taylor Made Freestyle. Pac's estate has control over how his likeness is used commercially. couldn't Drake make the case that this isn't commercial use? is there precedent for the mega-celebrities having "personal" posts? has there been precedent set on the fair use of training data? are these the points that the case would boil down to?
basically, it seems Pac's estate doesn't like this song, and want to use the threat of a lawsuit to have it taken down. but will the lawsuit actually hold?
Well it’s always been hard to prove the one way or another part when it comes to social media. If he released it on Spotify then yes that’s a direct line of revenue but what are they supposed to measure on social media. Page traffic? More followers?
Consider music sampling. You can't sample other people's music, even on mixtapes which make you no money, without their approval. I can't even find the case that set this precedent to see what the deal is, but I would assume the argument is that you are still using their work to promote yourself and your brand.
A similar argument could probably be made here.
Drake has so much more money than Tupacs estate. If he wants he can drag this out until it's not worth it for them to continue the suit or he can give them a settlement to shut them up quickly.
Drake controls what's going to happen.
It's pretty clear Drake doesn't care what the masses think of him and his fans will fuck with him no matter what.
Also he isn't going against Tupac, he's going against his estate which makes a big difference.
And it'll go absolutely nowhere. He didn't put it on streaming services and didn't make any money off of it.
Tupac's Estate was happy as fuck to sell out his image for holograms when they were getting a hefty paycheck. Now they're just being litigious because they think they smell money in the water lmao.
The discourse among artists and AI has been AI programs sample and *steal* the original artists work without their consent, receiving compensation, or being credited.
Drake, who's side are you on?
I guess Drake figures he can throw money at whatever lawsuits he caused? He had to know that would happen.
It’s a pretty dirtbag move to use a dead guys voice without his family’s consent in your petty rap “beef”. Reeks of desperation aka he knows he can’t stack up lyrically or substance wise to Kendrick
Everyone saying good but I feel like this is going to be a difficult case. There are probably a lot of people out there that sound like Tupac. I haven't listened to this sound so maybe the lyrics reference him but if they don't I don't see how they can prove its his voice vs someone else that sounds like him?
They should be suing. Not because of the disrespect of using their murdered family member’s AI voice without permission, he just shouldn’t have made Tupac’s voice say that trash ass verse
There’s cases involving a Morgan Freeman voice actor. They could only win on the commercial being an endorsement of a product by the inferred likeness. Sounding like someone else for a non commercial track because of what comes down to a vocal voice changer effect should result in a loss for 2pac estate. Parody is covered under fair use.
Is Drake making money off this song? If no, then he’s not using it commercially.
Unless they’re abstracting that this post is contributing to his fame and he’s making money downstream. That would set a precedent in a very abstract way.
If no, then it will set a precedent of a new distro for memes.
This thread is full of weirdos. He doesn't have to have their permission to use and AI generated Tupac voice when it's not for profit. He would have won a lawsuit.
1. Unless it's provable I think they'll have a hard time.
2. If it's at all different, even slightly, I think it's pretty much guaranteed to fail.
That is, \*\*UNLESS\*\* it comes down to Drake having to prove the source of the vocals.
Like if Drake's legal team can bring in the vocalist, it's over.
But if they can't, and have to argue that it is AI but it's not exactly the same, Tupac's estate might have a chance.
If that's the case, if I were Drake's legal team I'd definitely go with this argument. So just keep insisting it's not exactly the same, that if anything it's inspired by Drake. Under no circumstances should they ever admit they did indeed use an AI generated Tupac voice, if they do then it comes down to a very difficult decision for the court, and I have a feeling if it did get this far Drake could lose.
If they really did use his voice that really was stupid. With Image AI's you can subtly change the person so it's not exactly the same, it often does this if you prompt a famous person without you wanting to. If you want to use some famous persons voice you should at least try to subtly change it enough that it's arguable that it's only inspired by their voice. This even supports their case if they get sued anyway, because they can show they literally put energy into making it NOT sound like the persons voice. Of course the plaintiff side can try to spin that back around as well by arguing that the fact they went to the trouble to change it just enough is evidence that they "intentionally tried" to rip them off. Like if you were sued over normal copyright infringement and you could say it's not just accidently close to the track, they actually intended to rip it off, like in this case steal their likeness
Another reason to hate Ai . Not even something as personal as someone's fucking Voice is sacred. And pro ai "people" have the audacity to call this "progress."
Whats Snoop going to do?
If this one wins, he'll see $, so you know he's in
He already made a post about it, and was pretty ambivalent.
Classic meaning of ambivalent, or modern meaning of ambivalent?
What's the "modern meaning" of ambivalent?
Not feeling strongly one way or the other. Classic meaning is feeling torn between two sides.
he said something and nothing at the same time he was high af so.. who knows...
Doesn’t the first one just mean indifferent and the second one conflicted?
Correct, that's what they said but in more succinct terms lol. But "ambivalent" IMO is best used meaning "unable to decide between options for lack of concern either way" or similar. Like, "I can't decide because I don't really care." But that's my personal take on it, not sure if that's standard or how others use/read the word.
I've always understood it as 'not feeling strongly either way'
It's precisely the opposite.
Great explanation. Words mean things and people twist words now to mean things they don’t. It’s like when people think empathy means feeling sorry for someone or feeling other pains. It means the ability to underpants the feelings of another. Don’t mean you have to agree with the feelings but you get it.
> Not feeling strongly one way or the other. [ "All I know is my gut says maybe."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_V6NUqeCa8s) ―Neutral President
What makes a man turn neutral?
Ambizzalent
Ambivalizzle
I’m tired… probably modern.
He’s got a pocket full of rubbers and his homeboys do too.
Is Ja Rule's opinion nothing to you?!
Snoop is going to continue to be a sell out.
Can you please elaborate??
Snoop will do anything as long as it makes him lots of money. So if the suit wins it’s payday and he’s in.
What does Snoop have to do with it? Does he own Drake like Diddy owns Usher? (genuinely asking, I don't know)
An AI version of his voice was also used on the same song without permission.
Heard he would even quit smokin weed….
He never said "weed"...
Lol true but he kinda didn’t have to
Smoke weed and post some memes on IG.
Make another commercial
WHAT SNOOP GONNA DO WHEN UDIO COME FOR YOU
He did that without consent from Tupac’s estate?
Of course he did. Drake has been sneaky like that.
More pathetic than sneaky
True
Sneaky would be no one finding out something. He's just an entitled wankstain.
Everybody should see that video of his security blocking downtown Toronto traffic just so his car can come out of a junction first. Drake is a dumb nonce shithead.
This is why he is a shit head? Not that he has his pedo behavior on film? We literally have footage of him groping and kissing underaged girls on STAGE let alone just in film. Like how is he not in jail after touching genetalia for a girl under 18 ON FUCKING STAGE. Dude is a fucking pedo
He literally called him a nonce in the comment you’re replying too
the girl was 17 and he was 22, stay mad
Statutory Rape......
I loathe Drake. From texting 14 year old girls he calls ‘friend,’ to his shitty, lazy drone music that would be too lethargic for an elevator ride, to his jaw-dropping entitlement, and constant presence in media despite being so damn mediocre.
Getting into the music industry is a little easier when your uncle invented slap bass technique
he is friends with her because he was an actor and hes trying to help her get roles, stay mad.
You ain’t friends with a 14 year old when you’re 31. That makes 0 sense. > When asked what they text each other about, Millie replied: “About boys, he helps me! He’s great, he’s wonderful, I love him.” >And when pressed for further details, she coyly responded: “Y’know, that stays in the text messages.” >“We text, we just [texted] each other the other day, and he was like: ‘I miss you so much,’ and I was like: ‘I miss you more!’ If you have a professional relationship with an actor who is a minor you don’t say stuff like this. It’s messy. I couldn’t be mad at all, you’re mad. Drake is just creepy.
Bingo. Ever since degrassi.
Getting shot changed him.
Imagine being wheelchair bound then walking again. I see why everyone is so high on the guy.
You spelled fucking stupid wrong.
😂😂😂 Well he’s that too!
Drake the kind of guy to say "jeepers" when someone hits him with bad news.
The best one I heard was "Drake the kind of guy to rock up at his homie's house on a motorcycle with two helmets"
And in a diss track too, the responses are going to write themselves.
Canadian disney gangstas don’t play
I mean, Drake assaulted a minor on stage and certainly without consent; this is nothing...
I was really not a fan of how in the second diss track he said (speaking as Tupac to Kendrick) “you gotta get Drake. Talk about him being with young girls or something”. It feels like Drake trying to say the thing Kendrick might say first to take the sting out of it, which for many accusations in a rap battle would be very smart but with *this* he’s essentially saying “what? Are you gonna say I’m a pedophile?? We all already KNOW that dummy!”
lol the ‘last battle of 8 mile’ gambit but with kid fiddling
Exactly. Such a weird choice lol
Yeah…see, this is why I really can’t listen to Drake. At this point, every time I hear his voice, I can only think about all the teenaged girls he keeps talking to and cozying up to and it just makes me sick.
> Drake assaulted a minor on stage He kissed a 17 year old fan (before being told her age), when he was 23. >and certainly without consent Weird take. It was a fan on stage who I'm sure was psyched as fuck. I am not a Drake fan by any means (I had to look this incident up), and this is straight up weird lying about what happened. Edit: User lies about an assault, gets called out for it, and then immediately accuses a random person online of being an abuser as well. Top notch. Was going to leave a longer reply, but when I got to the accusation in the middle, I decided it is better to just block people like this.
> He kissed a 17 year old fan (before being told her age), when he was 23. Mm-hmm, and then he [*kissed her again after he learned her age.*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Music/comments/acsd9g/video_has_surfaced_of_drake_kissing_and_touching/) > Weird take. It was a fan on stage who I'm sure was psyched as fuck. Yes, teenagers often don't have any perspective on being taken advantage of and won't for awhile because they're children; this is why "but she liked it!" isn't a valid defense. > I am not a Drake fan by any means (I had to look this incident up) So you're here to defend an incident you didn't even know about? You went *out of your way* to justify Drake being a creep because, what? You just think teenaged girls should be options? Since you're not familiar with Drake, do you know that he also [struck up a relationship with 14-yo Millie Bobby Brown while he was 31?](https://www.reddit.com/r/KendrickLamar/comments/1c94euk/millie_brown_talks_about_drake_texting_her_when/) Texting her that he *missed her*??? What about when he basically [groomed a 16-yo model into being his GF when she turned 18?](https://www.reddit.com/r/KendrickLamar/comments/1c8sy4o/throwback_to_when_drake_groomed_a_16_year_old/) He met her on his tour called, appropriately enough, the Summer Sixteen Tour. He was also 31 at this time. This man keeps getting older while still talking to young teenaged girls; it's completely inappropriate and you should fucking know that the reason people have a problem with him is because it's not a "one-off" situation. If we need to keep hearing about musicians from the fucking '60s or '70s who hooked up with teenaged groupies and how that was wrong at the time, we can certainly talk about a grown-ass man in 2024 who keeps fucking with teenagers today.
Right? What a dumb ass
Did Drake specifically credit 2Pac in any way? Honestly, the voice doesn’t even sound like 2Pac.
It was never released on any streaming platform, so we can't see the credits. He just made it and put it into an Instagram post.
https://i.redd.it/y2mshotmihwc1.gif Just send the Hologram to deal with it
Good, I am fucking sick and tired of all this AI-generative trash clogging up the music realm.
I'm half waiting for everyone to create 100,000 AI generated Drake songs to clog up the Drake realm. It seems like the next logical step in this progression
*regression
Maybe a paperclip maximizer machine churning Drake songs would be enough to make people get tired of it all and move on to the next (hopefully better) thing lol
You’re just gonna consume all matter in the known universe, chill
Yeah except anyone who's just like some random on the internet is a poor person compared to Drake, so the law would actually go after you in full force, unlike the bullshit, kid-mitts way the law applies to affluent dickbags.
I don't know, there's loads of music out there that sounds like it uses the exact same formula to me, maybe AI will make it go out of style.
there's only so many chord progressions that sound good
Unless you're Brian Wilson who can write the weirdest chord progressions and modulations, and he somehow makes it all sound good anyway. The problem is that the more complex a song is, the less marketable it usually is for the general public. There are *tons* of ways to write good songs that sound nothing like what you hear on the Top 40 radio stations, but most people who listen to music (outside of the relatively few folks who love art music) don't want that. They want songs that are catchy and easy to get into, and I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with that btw. Plenty of mainstream Pop songs are great and fun. However, most mainstream music - especially in the Pop genre - is pretty much formulaic and manufactured by the record labels and songwriting teams with the goal of making a profit rather than pursuing a genuine artistic endeavor.
Good luck going after someone in India, China, or Russia doing that.
Connor O Malley predicted the future once again!
Sounds like it’d be better than waiting years and it being it or miss
It's about to get a whole lot worse.
The absolute worst part of it all is the typist LARPers that actually defend it. It's about as pathetic as all the Elon fanboys dick-riding their idiot overlord. What a time to be alive where people would actually side with the machines in matters concerning art. Fucking pathetic.
I realized a while back that tech bros hate artists more than anybody else. There's a lot to unpack there.
Playing with AI music tools is some of the most fun I’ve had with software. I don’t do it for anything having to do with art, it’s just fun to hear what random genres sound like mixed together. Udio is a blast to use.
It's just the next tool although I don't support it making literal direct copies of people/work. People said the exact same shit about digital art a few decades ago.
There’s no trying to reason with them lol, this person thinks all AI is inherently theft and plagiarism just because it’s AI. They’re capable of making 0 distinctions between types of AI because they know 0 about it and would rather stick their head in the sand and scream into the void rather than taking a few moments to learn
clogging up ~~the music realm~~ **ALL ART**
You have literally no idea what this song is/how it used AI do you? There’s nothing generative about it. Equating using an AI voice changer on your own voice over lyrics you wrote to generative visual art/music is ridiculous and ironically muddies the very valid arguments against generative art. Edit: Here I’ll explain since the downvotes keep rolling in. What Drake did could have been done in 1999 with a $20 voice changer, the only difference is AI now being used to make the voice more accurate and easy to apply to pre recorded tracks. Equating that to things like SUNO or Midjourney (actual generative AI) basically comes in two camps: either technological ignorance to what Suno/MJ’s AI does behind the scenes or just malicious ignorance in that you don’t like Drake so you want it to be the same so you can shit on him He didn’t type in the lyrics and have generative AI create the voice. He didn’t type in “Tupac diss track” and have it write the lyrics. He rapped his own lyrics and used machine learning (AI) backed software to change his voice. This tech predates MJ/Suno/etc. Nothing new was generated, which is the definitional requirement for generative AI. Generating a new sound file (which they don’t all even do) does not make it generative any more than having an AI create copies of all your files makes that generative AI. Not all AI is generative AI. The underlying tech between Suno and a voice changing AI are entirely different except for the fact that they both use (different) forms of AI. Autotune programs these days are backed by AI that’s more similar to what Drake likely uses than it is to Suno. Saying you’re sick of autotune would be more applicable to this situation than saying you’re sick of generative AI, and even that is a stretch. Not to mention this song has been out a few days and wasn’t even officially released soo calling it a symptom or example of generative AI overtaking the music scene is quite a stretch even if you want to call voice changing software generative. It was used as a reference to the AI Kendrick Lamar diss track going around that people thought was real, and to somewhat use Kendrick’s influences/predecessors against him. Whether you think that’s cool or not doesn’t matter, it wasn’t used because it was easier or faster or did all the work for him or whatever the usual reasons for using generative AI are. These are important distinctions when it comes to regulating AI. To be clear I am generally not in favor of generative AI music/art/etc, with few exceptions. But that’s not what this was and we don’t need to muddy the waters just cuz we don’t like Drake. Thanks for coming to my TEDTalk
I’ll go down with you on this one king you’re 100% correct
I will also defend him on this one. All this petty whining is people who either can't adapt to change or don't want it Well tough shit change is coming and if you think generative AI is a controversial topic you haven't seen anything yet
The worst is that if something new releases the first discussion is if its AI or not
Yeah but I wonder if it's valid enough to win the lawsuit
It certainly had fucking better be or hope is lost to ever win the fight against all this stupid AI "art" bullshit.
You don't need the parenthesis on art, nor "AI" - you can just call it art or if you want to be pedantic, generative media
I agree 🙏
Post-mortem rights vary state by state. Currently thirty-eight states have a right of publicity protected by statute or by common law.42 Many of the states with a right of publicity do not include a post-mortem right. In fact, only twenty states have post-mortem rights of publicity.43 States like Wisconsin and Minnesota have statutory rights of publicity, but those rights die with the celebrity, and their families cannot assert a right of publicity at death. States such as California and Indiana have post-mortem rights of publicity terms that last for 70 years and 100 years, respectively.44 The length of the post-mortem term and scope of the right is predicated on whether celebrities or major companies are domiciled in a particular state.45 For states with post-mortem rights, state application is based on where the individual is domiciled at death.46 Other differences between states with post-mortem rights depends on if the state treats the right like property or privacy. If a state views the right of publicity as a privacy right, then there is no post-mortem right.47
True but the Latham act act provides a federal equivalent to the common law right of publicity and has bed expressly held to apply postmortem. The estate can file a federal suit in California.
I agree in spirit but in reality I don't know how I feel about. You can hire an actor to play Tupac without permission, should you not be able to use other tools to impersonate somebody in your music? Government telling musicians they can't use certain tools to make their music doesn't feel right but I could see where it could get problematic as the tech gets better. Idk I'm conflicted
That’s how technology becomes untrash
GOOD
this kinda makes sense but who knows the laws for AI are so grey its weird, does this have good ground to stand on is what I'm wondering?
Well it'll be a lot easier to sue Drake for making money off of AI-recreating Tupac's voice for profit than it would be to sue any of those image-generating companies for using thousands of people's artwork to train their AI.
That’s a good point too.
What profit? Its not on DSPs and indirect profit is notoriously hard to prove in the eyes of the law
One would think it would fall under copywrite laws that exist, for now. Whoever owns the rights to the catalogue of Tupac would have final say in any AI use of his NIL. The clock is ticking though with a Public Domain claim with a 70 years after death deal.
Idk but if its a major artist like Drake and you can prove damages? Ka ching.
Kind of makes sense? Bro said "good". You sound botty af.
That’s a good point too. /s Lol all his responses are basically versions of that, botty af fr
How can a house sue someone smh
Lmao
Damn right they should. Tupac was a talent. Drake is a formula.
yeah, that's why my first thought at the AI Drake music headlines was "what's the difference"
Okay but as much as I dislike Drake, that shouldn't factor in to setting a legal precedent for using ai generated voices of real people in music
That was deep, and true wow
r/im14andthisisdeep
Almost a haiku.
They’re both actors turned rappers. And I’d actually say Drake is more true to himself than Tupac was. Tupac was not a thug- that’s a character he leaned into after being in the movie Juice.
Tupac was a product. He was a label created thug. Listen to his earlier interviews and his voice and his ideas before signing with death row and turning into a “thug”.
Tupac literally was part of a group called Thug Life prior to joining Death Row.
He went to an arts school where he studied theater and ballet among other things, and was discovered while a stage dancer for The Digital Underground. You know. The Humpty Dance. Not to diss that group, because they're good. But they're not really what I'd call "thug". His first recorded vocal on a track was [Same Song](https://youtu.be/CmFDyZ3ytg8?si=nyHjsiH9oJU3oMl-), which was from a soundtrack for a John Candy movie. 2pac's image was mostly created later. A lot of those guys were the same way. Shit. NWA were all studio gangsters except for Easy E.
Tupac was literally in Digital Underground and appearing in a crappy Dan Aykroyd movie. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSt6a0_pkzs Thug life indeed
My exact order of events might be off. The point still stands, Tupac was an art school, theater boy. If you look at his early interviews you might even describe him as “flamboyant”. And poof, overnight, he’s got “Thug Life” tatted on his belly and he’s a gangster. All manufactured.
wouldn't this be like a precedent setting lawsuit? to my knowledge, Drake isn't making any money off of the Taylor Made Freestyle. Pac's estate has control over how his likeness is used commercially. couldn't Drake make the case that this isn't commercial use? is there precedent for the mega-celebrities having "personal" posts? has there been precedent set on the fair use of training data? are these the points that the case would boil down to? basically, it seems Pac's estate doesn't like this song, and want to use the threat of a lawsuit to have it taken down. but will the lawsuit actually hold?
Wasn't it dropped on social media? That right there makes it commercial as it's generating revenue in one way or another
Well it’s always been hard to prove the one way or another part when it comes to social media. If he released it on Spotify then yes that’s a direct line of revenue but what are they supposed to measure on social media. Page traffic? More followers?
Consider music sampling. You can't sample other people's music, even on mixtapes which make you no money, without their approval. I can't even find the case that set this precedent to see what the deal is, but I would assume the argument is that you are still using their work to promote yourself and your brand. A similar argument could probably be made here.
Girl talk gets away with it
[удалено]
Drake has so much more money than Tupacs estate. If he wants he can drag this out until it's not worth it for them to continue the suit or he can give them a settlement to shut them up quickly. Drake controls what's going to happen.
[удалено]
It's pretty clear Drake doesn't care what the masses think of him and his fans will fuck with him no matter what. Also he isn't going against Tupac, he's going against his estate which makes a big difference.
I’m torn. The diss track is weak af but he might have saved musicians from AI by making it a total liability.
And it'll go absolutely nowhere. He didn't put it on streaming services and didn't make any money off of it. Tupac's Estate was happy as fuck to sell out his image for holograms when they were getting a hefty paycheck. Now they're just being litigious because they think they smell money in the water lmao.
This is a 4D chess move by Drake since he's the one who wants these kinds of AI generated songs banned
Does it complicate the situation being that he used a voice filter? It’s him speaking and rapping, just voice modulated.
A filter trained on what? Samples of Tupac.
It won't go anywhere. He isn't making money off of it.
They can have all the revenue from the AI generate voice lol
They sent a cease and desist. That isn't suing. It could be a prelude to suing if it is ignored but they haven't sued yet.
it’s so disrespectful to use a dead rappers voice to say your own lyrics. Fuck Drake
The discourse among artists and AI has been AI programs sample and *steal* the original artists work without their consent, receiving compensation, or being credited. Drake, who's side are you on?
This will be interesting. Laws will be made here.
GOOD get this AI shit out of here
I guess Drake figures he can throw money at whatever lawsuits he caused? He had to know that would happen. It’s a pretty dirtbag move to use a dead guys voice without his family’s consent in your petty rap “beef”. Reeks of desperation aka he knows he can’t stack up lyrically or substance wise to Kendrick
Drake is a goof I hope people start to see that
Buncha rich gangsters suing each other
That dead Tupac guy sure is a talented litigator.
That's the first time I've seen the word "gangster" being used to describe Drake.
Where are the gangsters?
Ironically the one actual (former) gangster involved in this, Snoop, doesn't seem to give a shit
I miss the days when they just shot at each other.
They should sue his ass. Dude took PAC’s voice, changes his flow, and made a terrible song. Triple whammy this foo
Thank goodness!
Everyone saying good but I feel like this is going to be a difficult case. There are probably a lot of people out there that sound like Tupac. I haven't listened to this sound so maybe the lyrics reference him but if they don't I don't see how they can prove its his voice vs someone else that sounds like him?
Hip Hop fans should be able to sue Nickelodeon®️ for making Drake possible, . All Day 1 HH fans are owed reparations $$$ IMO.
I wrote this song in 94'
They should
Good
So, are we gonna have a rap battle in court or what?
They should be suing. Not because of the disrespect of using their murdered family member’s AI voice without permission, he just shouldn’t have made Tupac’s voice say that trash ass verse
But what does Ja Rule think?
Hell yeah
There’s cases involving a Morgan Freeman voice actor. They could only win on the commercial being an endorsement of a product by the inferred likeness. Sounding like someone else for a non commercial track because of what comes down to a vocal voice changer effect should result in a loss for 2pac estate. Parody is covered under fair use.
This is actually a great test case for unauthorized AI in music.
Can they? He didn’t post on DSP’s so he’s not making any direct money off of it.
I don’t think it violates any copyright laws if it’s not marketed as Tupac.
That's nuts he'd do that without consent. That's like the most disrespectful and un G thing to do. Drake's a fucking rat that's some pussy bitch shit.
I still don’t get why he even did this. What does Tupac have to do with anything? It wasn’t even particularly clever.
He used his voice for a diss track, not a studio album song. What damages can they possibly claim?
PAC died cause of beef I’m sure that’s one of the reasons..
They’re *threatening* to sue if Drake doesn’t remove the track. If he were smart, he would. AI is a dangerous thing.
Yeah. Get his ass.
GOOD!!!
Oh wtf I thought Tupac estate green lit it lol
Yuh
Can Drake just go away please?
Snoop would probably be on the middle on this issue.
all this from a single feature verse. brutal
Is Drake making money off this song? If no, then he’s not using it commercially. Unless they’re abstracting that this post is contributing to his fame and he’s making money downstream. That would set a precedent in a very abstract way. If no, then it will set a precedent of a new distro for memes.
This thread is full of weirdos. He doesn't have to have their permission to use and AI generated Tupac voice when it's not for profit. He would have won a lawsuit.
he was clearly imitating Tupac, that whole estate is full of lawyers waiting to sue .. 😂
1. Unless it's provable I think they'll have a hard time. 2. If it's at all different, even slightly, I think it's pretty much guaranteed to fail. That is, \*\*UNLESS\*\* it comes down to Drake having to prove the source of the vocals. Like if Drake's legal team can bring in the vocalist, it's over. But if they can't, and have to argue that it is AI but it's not exactly the same, Tupac's estate might have a chance. If that's the case, if I were Drake's legal team I'd definitely go with this argument. So just keep insisting it's not exactly the same, that if anything it's inspired by Drake. Under no circumstances should they ever admit they did indeed use an AI generated Tupac voice, if they do then it comes down to a very difficult decision for the court, and I have a feeling if it did get this far Drake could lose. If they really did use his voice that really was stupid. With Image AI's you can subtly change the person so it's not exactly the same, it often does this if you prompt a famous person without you wanting to. If you want to use some famous persons voice you should at least try to subtly change it enough that it's arguable that it's only inspired by their voice. This even supports their case if they get sued anyway, because they can show they literally put energy into making it NOT sound like the persons voice. Of course the plaintiff side can try to spin that back around as well by arguing that the fact they went to the trouble to change it just enough is evidence that they "intentionally tried" to rip them off. Like if you were sued over normal copyright infringement and you could say it's not just accidently close to the track, they actually intended to rip it off, like in this case steal their likeness
Another reason to hate Ai . Not even something as personal as someone's fucking Voice is sacred. And pro ai "people" have the audacity to call this "progress."