AI is here and here to stay whether we choose to adopt it or not.
Like Joanne, I am all over this because I am primarily a musician as in playing an instrument and writing the musical parts. Lyrics are something where extra assistance is welcomed. Same with SynthV because I am not a naturally good singer. Using these tools together gets me to a stage where I can develop a song further.
The SongBrain app that I wrote enables me to do this and it isn't just a case of me being lazy, there's a couple of thousand lines of code in there!
Commercially successful (as in making loads of money) songs have nothing to do with the song usually. It's about the amount of promotion budget, image of the artist etc. and of course, we are in it for the art not to make money (sure).
The litigious arguments are moot in some way because AI is not going away and it has caught a large established industry off guard. Things will sort themselves eventually (after a lot of money has been spent).
Sharp businesses will find a country where AI output can be copyrighted and base their services there perhaps. After all, how much of the world's shipping carry a "flag of covenience" usually Liberia or somewhere.
This is a great thread and an imortant one and opens up may questions about where assistance begins and ends.
Hopefully, the alphabet is out of copyright now or I'm in bother.
My comment was simply that the legal/liability ramifications of AI generated intellectual property are being scrutinized and it MAY become something actionable. If it were me, I wouldn't use it for commercially released music until it all plays out. Who knows what will happen, they may force AI programs to put a digital watermark on AI generated content. I can absolutely see the PROs (BMI, ASCAP, etc.) adding something the song registration process where you have to disclose if you used AI in the creation of the song (the do this very thing currently for songs using song samples).
Point being, the technology was released before the legality of it was determined. That's enough for me, as a creator, to take a more cautious approach to using it.
I think where clear cut understandings of AI e.g., chatgpt, Bard etc are defined, that's one thing but where is that unclear line between algorithmic generation and AI? Many apps / vsts claim to be AI when in fact they are clever algorithms. The term AI is quite nebulous but I think most us would agree that machine learning and neural networks are broadly defined as AI. Therefore when asked to declare whether AI had been used the chances of being overdeclared and underclared are pretty equal I'd say. I think the onus would be for whatever assistive technology is there e.g., BIAB, RapidComposer etc etc has to clearly state whether it is AI or not.
What a minefield!
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
You obviously haven't been paying attention and haven't got the slightest understanding about what the courts have ruled.
Last edited by Byron Dickens; 01/26/2401:23 PM.
Byron Dickens
BIAB. CbB. Mixbus 32C 8 HP Envy. Intel core i7. 16GB RAM W10. Focusrite Scarlett 18i 20. Various instruments played with varying degrees of proficiency.
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
You obviously haven't been paying attention and haven't got the slightest understanding about what the courts have ruled.
I did however pay attention to the title of this thread which was: "has anyone on this forum used chatgpt to help them write lyrics" as opposed to sub discussions as to what may or may not have already been decided by courts.
I am speaking in general terms and speculating how this may go in the future if the whole world goes super twitchy about AI, is it ok to do that in your thread?
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
I think you're mixing apples and oranges.
The question that was before the court was whether an "original work" created a non-human process could be given a copyright. Whether or not the underlying algorithm was AI didn't have any part of the legal question.
The court made a ruling strictly on a matter of law - copyright is only conferred to works created by a human.
The question that you're raising is whether the use of an AI plugin confers any rights to to the manufacturer. The answer still has nothing to do with whether the plugin is AI or not - it's got to do with the product license.
For example, I could create a plugin that boosts the volume of audio by 100%, and the license would demand that using that plugin obliges the end user to share 50% of the net profits of any audio run through the plugin.
And... it would be perfectly legal. That's why it's a good thing to read the EULA.
After following this thread here is my take. Putting aside the copyright side of things.
(1) I use chatgpt or something similar to create lyrics from a prompt.
(2) I write lyrics myself with whatever comes to mind without chatgpt.
In either case how would anyone know which was which. Chatgpt would probably give me something slightly better as I am rubbish at lyrics. Will they use AI to analyse the output, would AI be correct in working out which was which?
^^^ my point exactly 3. I use chat gpt to generate some lyrics and change them a bit (or a lot) How would they know the difference? It is just text in a notepad. It is not a picture.
Supposing one wrote the whole piece by hand and then used one "AI" plugin in the final mastering chain. A nightmare awaits.
I think you're mixing apples and oranges.
The question that was before the court was whether an "original work" created a non-human process could be given a copyright. Whether or not the underlying algorithm was AI didn't have any part of the legal question.
The court made a ruling strictly on a matter of law - copyright is only conferred to works created by a human.
I was meaning more along the lines of a previous statement which said that PROs may insist on knowing if AI was used in any part of the song. "Created" is also nebulous unless it means in entirety, in which case, that's another can of worms.
Does the fact that a human "created" the prompt, count? Or, are we saying that the "machine" decides one day to write a song unsolicited and send it to me?
I was meaning more along the lines of a previous statement which said that PROs may insist on knowing if AI was used in any part of the song.
Ah, thanks for the clarification.
Rodger Brown's comment was speculation.
From a legal point of view, songs created by AI can't be copyrighted. That puts them in the public domain, free to use.
However, only the lyrics of the song would be public domain. So if you wrote a song using those lyrics, all the other elements of the song would not be in the public domain.
For example, look and songs that Janice and Bud release. Even though the lyrics are in the public domain, they've created versions that are often made unique by re-working the lyrics, arrangement, and harmonies. So they own that particular version of the song, including the mechanical and sync rights.
Plus, any changes to public domain lyrics are copyright the person who made the changes.
So even if someone knows that the lyrics were generated by AI, unless they know for sure that all the lyrics were the product of AI, using the lyrics would be a risky proposition. More on that later...
Originally Posted by Mike. R.
"Created" is also nebulous unless it means in entirety, in which case, that's another can of worms.
Does the fact that a human "created" the prompt, count? Or, are we saying that the "machine" decides one day to write a song unsolicited and send it to me?
IANAL, but I suggest that even though a human created the prompt, the courts are likely to find that the AI would have created the lyrics. That's because:
1. The ideas at the prompt aren't likely to be original; and even if they were, 2. The AI can generate hundreds of different songs from the prompt, demonstrating what makes each song original is the work by the AI, not the prompt.
In any event, it would be safest to treat AI lyrics the same as public domain lyrics.
Originally Posted by JoanneCooper
3. I use chat gpt to generate some lyrics and change them a bit (or a lot) How would they know the difference? It is just text in a notepad. It is not a picture
However, OpenAI, the company that owns ChatGPT, keep a log of your conversation history, including "your email address, device, IP address and location, as well as any public or private information you use in your ChatGPT prompts."
So if there were a lawsuit claiming that song lyrics that an author claimed to own the copyright to were actually public domain, they could be compelled to produce the AI lyrics - even if they lyrics were generate via a third party tool such as your own.
Again, IANAL, but if you wanted to use AI lyrics for inspiration, but wanted to hold the final copyright, it would make sense to keep the original version of the AI lyrics, and make sure the final version was sufficiently different.
Lennon, while critical of Harrison, was well aware of how easy it was to accidentally mimic another song: “In the early years, I’d often carry around someone else’s song in my head, and only when I’d put it down on tape — because I can’t write music — would I consciously change it to my own melody because I knew that otherwise somebody would sue me,” John said in 1980. “George could have changed a few bars in that song and nobody could have ever touched him, but he just let it go and paid the price. Maybe he thought God would just sort of let him off.”
Interesting thread. I've no opinion on the legality of ChatGPT or other ai. So, I have no comment on that aspect but regarding the thread question, here's my comment.
I wanted to see how ChatPGT compared to a fairly complex song lyric of an existing song and I queried ChatPGT to write lyrics for a song that I described the story from an original tune.
I decided to request lyrics from ChatGPT to the story in a song by singer/songwriter Guthrie Thomas of an original song of his titled, "Melissa" and compare the quality of lyrics between the two. Here are the results: My lyric request to ChatGPT: User: write song lyrics about a waitress named Melissa that travels by her older, worn out car planning to visit family for Christmas. The weather is icy and with snow fall. There's a bad auto accident on Melissa's trip home with an 18 wheeler driven by a drunk driver and Melissa is killed. There are thousands of people mourning Melissa at her funeral.
It came up with accurate lyrics but nothing as picturesque and with imagery to equal the original. I've attached lyrics from both sources of Guthrie Thomas's song, "Melissa" and ChatPGT's lyrical composition of the same story.
Nice one Charlie. You got a decent response and it may also depend on the song or how much you feed the prompt. I tried something similar (for academic purposes) by asking for some lyrics about a lady who's sure ... etc and put the entire 1st verse in and asked for the result to be influenced by LZ.
What I got back was very close to the lyrics to STH.
Very interesting, and, this copyright thing is very complex. From what I can see as a "man in the street, who obviously doesn't understand these things", is that the AI generated lyrics can't be copyrighted but an original song can be even if it includes the AI lyrics. So what's the problem if someone else wants to use the same lyrics in a different song? You still get the rights to your own song so who cares?
This is just an intermediate issue anyway because, it will only be a matter of time before anyone with no musical skill whatsoever can say something like "Give me a new Stones Album ca 1973" and get a perfect 12 track album of new songs exactly like that. Sure they can't sell it but who'd buy it anyway when they can fire off the same prompts themselves and enjoy "New" material?
Music will be produced and consumed in an entirely new way and imagine being able to bring old musicians "back to life" and enjoy even more from them than their original catalogue.
These are just my views of course, but just because we feel there is a moral sense not to do it, you can bet if there's money to be made or saved then someone will
re: this statement - "That puts them in the public domain, free to use."
I don't believe that to be the case necessarily, because if the lyrics in question were in any way derivative, there possibly could be a claim against it. Again, all of this is speculation at this point, but if (for example) you said "I want something similar to 'Help Me Make It Through The Night'", there's an argument to be made that Kristofferson's song was the "source material".
It's going to be interesting to see how it all plays out.
Also, and someone correct me on this if I'm wrong, I believe when you copyright a song that includes lyrics, there isn't a distinction between the words and music unless you file copyrights on both. In other words, if the music infringes on another work, the entire song (including lyrics) is liable.
In other words, if the music infringes on another work, the entire song (including lyrics) is liable.
Well, people who sue for infringement will claim they then own some share in the infringing song's profits. What part of the song is infringing won't matter, so it could be lyrics, melody, a bassline... whatever.
How much of the profits they feel they are due depends on different factors, but I supect it's more a function of "how much to we think we can get" rather than some actual calculation.
From what I can see as a "man in the street, who obviously doesn't understand these things", is that the AI generated lyrics can't be copyrighted but an original song can be even if it includes the AI lyrics. So what's the problem if someone else wants to use the same lyrics in a different song? You still get the rights to your own song so who cares?
The AI lyrics I’ve read would fit nicely in the Victorian era given the extraordinarily high usage of forced rhymes.
Bud
Our albums and singles are on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, Pandora and more. If interested search on Janice Merritt. Thanks! Our Videos are here on our website.
The AI lyrics I’ve read would fit nicely in the Victorian era given the extraordinarily high usage of forced rhymes.
Bud
You could be onto something there Bud.
"Oh dear Queen Victoria, ruler of the throne, In this missive to you, my wit is finely honed. A jest or two, I bring forth with glee, For laughter, my dear, is the best courtesy.
And as for Prince Albert, your steadfast mate, I hear he fancies a waltz, both early and late. With a twirl and a dip, they dance with grace, A royal ballroom, a most amusing space."
By William Gladstone apparently, from the time when he fancied himself as a songwriter, but he gave up and became Prime Minister instead.
Last edited by Mike. R.; 02/01/2407:03 AM. Reason: Forgot to say, I got ChatGPT to write that.
The AI lyrics I’ve read would fit nicely in the Victorian era given the extraordinarily high usage of forced rhymes.
Bud
You could be onto something there Bud.
"Oh dear Queen Victoria, ruler of the throne, In this missive to you, my wit is finely honed. A jest or two, I bring forth with glee, For laughter, my dear, is the best courtesy.
And as for Prince Albert, your steadfast mate, I hear he fancies a waltz, both early and late. With a twirl and a dip, they dance with grace, A royal ballroom, a most amusing space."
By William Gladstone apparently, from the time when he fancied himself as a songwriter, but he gave up and became Prime Minister instead.
Nailed!
Bud
Our albums and singles are on Spotify, Apple Music, Amazon Music, YouTube Music, Pandora and more. If interested search on Janice Merritt. Thanks! Our Videos are here on our website.
Originally Posted by JoanneCooper The OP wasn't discussing ai generated songs but rather ai generated lyrics. Ai is just a tool. Same as BIAB is a tool. Use it, don’t use it but don’t shoot down those who do.
I find it a bit odd that people who use machines to assist with the generation of music are so against using machines to help generate lyrics.
Actually, the Librarian of Congress ruled exactly that, an appeals court upheld it and SCOTUS has declined to take up the case. In the US, that ruling has the effect of law.
As I have posted earlier, withhout that ruling, the WGA writers's strike would not have settled. Scripts, like lyrics, are words. Congress has many bills trying to codify this ruling but there's nothing in any of these bills invalidating the concept.
In the meantime, the WGA settlement has put forward a framework on how to apply these ideas into rules that both producers and writers can use going forward. I will recommend that you read that and do some research instead of twisting what others post into things they never meant.
The only person who has suggested not using AI in the creative process is you. There's no copyright police here except in your imagination. Please stop.
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows® Today!
If you’ve already purchased Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®, great news—a new update is now available! This update introduces a handy new feature: a vertical cursor in the Tracks window that shows the current location across all tracks, and more.
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Boot Camp: The AI Lyrics Generator
With Band-in-a-Box 2025® for Windows®, we've introduced an exciting new feature: the AI Lyrics Generator! In this video, Tobin guides you step-by-step on how to make the most of this new tool.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Boot Camp: The AI Lyrics Generator video.
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Using VST3 Plugins
Band-in-a-Box 2025® for Windows® now includes support for VST3 plugins, bringing even more creative possibilities to your music production. Join Simon as he guides you through the process in this easy-to-follow demonstration!
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Using VST3 Plugins
Video: Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows: Using The BB Stem Splitter!
In this video, Tobin provides a crash course on using the new BB Stem Splitter feature included in Band-in-a-Box 2025® for Windows®. During this process he also uses the Audio Chord Wizard (ACW) and the new Equalize Tempo feature.
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows®: Using the BB Stem Splitter
Check out the forum post for some optional Tips & Tricks!
Congrats to Misha (Rustyspoon)…downloaded/installed a full Audiophile 2025!
Breaking News!
We’re thrilled to announce that Rustyspoon has made PG history as the very first person to successfully complete the download and install of the full Band-in-a-Box 2025 Windows Audiophile Edition (with FLAC files)—a whopping 610GB of data!
A big shoutout to Rustyspoon for stepping up to be our test "elf!"
With the launch of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows, we're adding new videos to our YouTube channel. We'll also share them here once they are published so you can easily find all the Band-in-a-Box® 2025 and new Add-on videos in one place!
Whether it's a summary of the new features, demonstrations of the 202 new RealTracks, new XPro Styles PAK 8, or Xtra Styles PAKs 18, information on the 2025 49-PAK, or detailed tutorials for other Band-in-a-Box® 2025 features, we have you covered!
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Windows is here, packed with major new features and an incredible collection of available new content! This includes 202 RealTracks (in Sets 449-467), plus 20 bonus Unreleased RealTracks in the 2025 49-PAK. There are new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 4, two new sets of “RealDrums Stems,” XPro Styles PAK 8, Xtra Styles PAK 19, and more!
Special Offers
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 with savings of up to 50% on most upgrade packages during our special—available until December 31, 2024! Visit our Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all the purchase options available.
2025 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK Add-ons
We've packed our Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK with some incredible Add-ons! The Free Bonus PAK is automatically included with most Band-in-a-Box® for Windows 2025 packages, but for even more Add-ons (including 20 Unreleased RealTracks!) upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49. You can see the full lists of items in each package, and listen to demos here.
If you have any questions, feel free to connect with us directly—we’re here to help!
One of our representatives will be happy to help you over the phone. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday, and 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST Saturday. We are closed Sunday. You can also send us your questions via email.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you on our Live Chat or by email. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST (GMT -8) Saturday; Closed Sunday.
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean