I have used the new template below to show how it looks. We can add more details to the linked CONTRIBUTING.md in the pop repo.
I have not included any LLM (also known as AI) generated content in...
i think the copyright question is still unanswered: it could turn out that any LLM-generated code is a copyright violation by definition unless trained exclusively on a clean, legitimately-obtained dataset (which few of the major models are).
I think this argument is BS, there are several remix/sample based albums that count as derived works and AFAIK, no one is getting paid.
Not exactly the same, and the music industry has had plenty of lawsuits going both ways on that kind of thing establishing a status quo for remixes and samples in music
In many cases, “AFAIK” in your case you may have no idea that in fact, the copyright holder is being paid. Or the copyright holder is one and the same, with rights sometimes assigned to someone other than the musicians involved.
I think this argument is BS, there are several remix/sample based albums that count as derived works and AFAIK, no one is getting paid.
Not exactly the same, and the music industry has had plenty of lawsuits going both ways on that kind of thing establishing a status quo for remixes and samples in music
SilvaGunner 🫡
“Most” music is also under a compulsory licensing system, while virtually no code, prose, or visual art is.
Note that the remix/sample example hasn’t always worked out as you state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Sweet_Symphony#Credits_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Sweet_Lord#Copyright_infringement_suit
In many cases, “AFAIK” in your case you may have no idea that in fact, the copyright holder is being paid. Or the copyright holder is one and the same, with rights sometimes assigned to someone other than the musicians involved.