- Paul McCartney has spoken out to warn of the dangers of unregulated AI for future musicians.
- The comments come after AI assisted in the production of Grammy-nominated song ‘Now and Then’.
- UK lawmakers are determined to protect creators from unauthorized use of their art to train AI models.
Paul McCartney doesn’t want to let AI completely drown out human musicians just yet. Ahead of a debate in the UK Parliament on AI and copyright, the legendary Beatle warned that artificial intelligence could push young musicians off the stage unless great care is taken.
This may seem a little surprising after AI helped McCartney and the rest of his bandmates land Grammy nominations recently for Record of the Year and Best Rock Performance. The “lost” song “From time to time“used AI to recover and restore audio, including the sound of the late John Lennon’s voice. The AI tools lifted and enhanced Lennon’s vocal track from an old demo, making it appear that Lennon was back in the room with the rest of the band.
However, McCartney is singing a new tune about generative AI and its impact on musicians. An endless stream of AI-derived music that imitates human artists without giving credit or paying royalties could devastate the chances of emerging artists breaking out.
This warning comes at a wonderful time for AI and music. The British government is considering changes to its data laws to allow artists to opt out of using their work to train AI. The law would allow creators to prohibit AI developers from training models in their work, limiting the AI’s ability to imitate those songs and sounds.
“Us[’ve] We have to be careful because it could just take over and we don’t want that to happen especially to young composers and writers. [for] who, it may be the only way[’re] “I’m going to make a career,” McCartney said in a statement published by the Guardian. “If AI eliminates that, it would be very sad.”
Face the music of AI
Of course, some think the opt-out system is not enough. Many are pushing to shift the burden from artists to AI developers. The argument is that it should be up to AI companies to ask permission to use music first. Otherwise, musicians could spend more time monitoring the AI than making actual music. And considering how quickly AI is evolving, it’s a bit like playing copyright “whack-a-mole.”
The debate in Parliament is not the only place where AI and music rights holders collide. Many apps that use AI to make music, such as Tad.AI, Sunoand Udio face each other demands from the main music labels. “Now and Then” may be a hit, but McCartney seems convinced that AI could dilute the value of human creativity in music.
Regulators must find the right balance between artists’ rights and AI innovations. Until then, musicians want AI developers to take a page from McCartney’s work and “let it be.”
