Latest on MJJC

Ebay: Get Your Weight Off Of Me????

kai said:
You already lost the convo but didn’t realize it
Click to expand...
The fact that you couldn't answer any of my questions really tells us who lost the argument here. I will give you one more chance to honestly answer these questions: If you do believe your creative input represents 95% of what these tracks are, why not release them with your own vocals and name, rather than questionably linking them to Michael Jackson? Would Michael Jackson have approved your AI-generated tracks? How does his family feel about your illegal AI creations?
 
alanram said:
The fact that you couldn't answer any of my questions really tells us who lost the argument here. I will give you one more chance to honestly answer these questions: If you do believe your creative input represents 95% of what these tracks are, why not release them with your own vocals and name, rather than questionably linking them to Michael Jackson? Would Michael Jackson have approved your AI-generated tracks? How does his family feel about your illegal AI creations?
Click to expand...

Bro..
it’s simple.. the songs would sound like shit and my voice is pitched up drastically.
Mind your own business.
You yourself just confirmed that there’s no law for A.I stuff.

Your ethical opinions about AI and MJ Family are not more than this and have no value when we talk about law.

Go support the estate or read a book 🤣
 
Richard76 said:
The point is that in Serious Effect and Monkey Business he sounds like himself. I know, that he like time to time change his voice, but I can't believe that's it's him. I mean, even Malachi's voice sounded more similar to Michael's.
Click to expand...
Yeahhhhhhh…….. ._.
 
NetflexKing said:
If you really believe that A.I. is illegal and unethical then 99% of MJ material on YouTube should be deleted, including covers, tribute videos, lyric videos etc. And following the laws the Cascio Tracks for 8 damn years were more legitimate than a Dirty Diana Remix by Azura for example.
Click to expand...
That's not what I stated. AI-generated content is distinct from covers, tributes, and lyric videos. These videos utilize MJ's original work, which he intended to release, and YouTube automatically attributes the copyrights to the original owners. In contrast, Danzberg is fabricating songs and registering them at BMI as his intellectual property. These songs leverage AI vocals derived from copyrighted material. Also, he seems indifferent to Michael Jackson's integrity. I've posed the question to him multiple times: "Would MJ have approved having his voice cloned and used in songs he never intended to be part of?" The answer is unequivocally "no."
 
alanram said:
That's not what I stated. AI-generated content is distinct from covers, tributes, and lyric videos. These videos utilize MJ's original work, which he intended to release, and YouTube automatically attributes the copyrights to the original owners. In contrast, Danzberg is fabricating songs and registering them at BMI as his intellectual property. These songs leverage AI vocals derived from copyrighted material. Also, he seems indifferent to Michael Jackson's integrity. I've posed the question to him multiple times: "Would MJ have approved having his voice cloned and used in songs he never intended to be part of?" The answer is unequivocally "no."
Click to expand...

Just cause he wouldn’t have approved it (which we don’t know) doesn’t mean it’s illegal..

And also.. if I am not the legal writer/producer/owner of the songs. Who is it then Sherlock ?

You have literally no points In this discussion. All you do is trying to shine bad light on me… would Michael like that? I don’t know 🤷🏼‍♂️
 
kai said:
Bro..
it’s simple.. the songs would sound like shit and my voice is pitched up drastically.
Mind your own business.
You yourself just confirmed that there’s no law for A.I stuff.

Your ethical opinions about AI and MJ Family are not more than this and have no value when we talk about law.

Go support the estate or read a book 🤣
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I really did commit a mistake when saying there was no law concerning AI-generated vocals. This is actually a crime according to the Civil Code:

"According to the Civil Code, training artificial intelligence with human voice and generating songs require authorization of the individual whose voice is used and failure to obtain such authorization may be considered an infringement of personal rights, You added.

Besides, Zuo Xiaodong, professor from the School of Public Affairs of University of Science and Technology of China, pointed out that AI singers are essentially the application of deep synthesis technology which can bring about the problem that unauthorized use of someone's voice in AI applications can potentially infringe upon the rights and interests of the person whose voice is being imitated.

Voice, just like portrait, also possesses personal attributes, and the act of imitating, counterfeiting, or exploiting someone else's voice can potentially cause harm to the individual's personal rights and property rights, Zuo added."

Taken from Global Times article: Viral AI singers may have violated laws and rights; experts advocate more regulations
 
That’s about „generated“ stuff.
And also I am not sure if that counts for songs that are clearly marked as A.I.. so no matter how you try to twist the story, I don’t feel like doing something wrong. Sorry
 
kai said:
That’s about „generated“ stuff.
And also I am not sure if that counts for songs that are clearly marked as A.I.. so no matter how you try to twist the story, I don’t feel like doing something wrong. Sorry
Click to expand...
No, Danzberg, you are misinterpreting the professor's statement. They are clearly addressing AI-generated vocals. I suggest you read the entire article, as the issue they're discussing directly pertains to your actions. Your insistence that you don't feel you're "doing something wrong" in light of all my questions reveals a lot about your character. Furthermore, your statement, "would Michael like that? I don’t know," indicates a lack of genuine concern for Michael Jackson's potential feelings on the matter and a disregard for his family. I'm also curious: why would you register "fan-made" creations under your own name yet release them to the public under Michael Jackson's?
 
im not reading all this discussion but i will say that kai is talented and creative! MOTHER is up high in my spotify top 10 for this year. i wish i could stream it on spotify... why is is not up there anymore? luckily i downloaded it and could import to spotify local files.

keep on kai! haters gonna hate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MJ5
Glanni said:
im not reading all this discussion but i will say that kai is talented and creative! MOTHER is up high in my spotify top 10 for this year. i wish i could stream it on spotify... why is is not up there anymore? luckily i downloaded it and could import to spotify local files.

keep on kai! haters gonna hate.
Click to expand...
Your question "why is it not up there anymore?" is quite revealing about this entire discussion. Perhaps it's not there because the actual copyright owners did not want Kai Danzberg to financially benefit from his "fan creation" made from copyrighted MJ material.
 
alanram said:
No, Danzberg, you are misinterpreting the professor's statement. They are clearly addressing AI-generated vocals. I suggest you read the entire article, as the issue they're discussing directly pertains to your actions. Your insistence that you don't feel you're "doing something wrong" in light of all my questions reveals a lot about your character. Furthermore, your statement, "would Michael like that? I don’t know," indicates a lack of genuine concern for Michael Jackson's potential feelings on the matter and a disregard for his family. I'm also curious: why would you register "fan-made" creations under your own name yet release them to the public under Michael Jackson's?
Click to expand...

Nope.. you are misinterpreting. It’s about „A.I generated“ vocals. My songs are not AI generated vocals. It’s a singing voice conversion.

And it’s very simple.. the songs are registered under my name because I wrote them.
 
alanram said:
Your question "why is it not up there anymore?" is quite revealing about this entire discussion. Perhaps it's not there because the actual copyright owners did not want Kai Danzberg to financially benefit from his "fan creation" made from copyrighted MJ material.
Click to expand...


Wrong.

it’s not there cause a hater made take down claims.
 
kai said:
Nope.. you are misinterpreting. It’s about „A.I generated“ vocals. My songs are not AI generated vocals. It’s a singing voice conversion.

And it’s very simple.. the songs are registered under my name because I wrote them.
Click to expand...
Your vocals are AI-generated. I expected you to understand the technology a bit more since you're an AI enthusiast. The examples of AI-generated vocals stated in the article indeed refer to 'singing voice conversions'. Not to mention that even if they were talking about vocals that are entirely AI-generated, the legal problem resides in the dataset used to create them. It doesn't matter if Kai Danzberg sang the raw vocals or if the AI generated the vocals from scratch. They were made using a dataset of copyrighted content. It's intriguing that anyone who disagrees with something you do is immediately labeled as a 'hater'. Also, you haven't answered my question: why would you register 'fan-made' creations under your own name, yet RELEASE them to the public under Michael Jackson's name?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kai
alanram said:
Your vocals are AI-generated. I expected you to understand the technology a bit more since you're an AI enthusiast. The examples of AI-generated vocals stated in the article indeed refer to 'singing voice conversions'. Not to mention that even if they were talking about vocals that are entirely AI-generated, the legal problem resides in the dataset used to create them. It doesn't matter if Kai Danzberg sang the raw vocals or if the AI generated the vocals from scratch. They were made using a dataset of copyrighted content. It's intriguing that anyone who disagrees with something you do is immediately labeled as a 'hater'. Also, you haven't answered my question: why would you register 'fan-made' creations under your own name, yet RELEASE them to the public under Michael Jackson's name?
Click to expand...

I answered all your questions. Read back.
 
alanram said:
Currently, there's no specific law against the use of AI-generated vocals created from copyrighted material, given that this is a new area of concern.
Click to expand...
You should have done your homework. Fair Use in a non-commercial setting is not illegal and never will be. If you wanna argue the publicity clause then that's fair game, but you'd have to wade through the decades of impersonators in voice and physicality first to do that.
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
You should have done your homework. Fair Use in a non-commercial setting is not illegal and never will be. If you wanna argue the publicity clause then that's fair game, but you'd have to wade through the decades of impersonators in voice and physicality first to do that.
Click to expand...

Don’t waste you time like I did. He is not trying to be correct. He is looking for reasons to make me look bad.
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
You should have done your homework. Fair Use in a non-commercial setting is not illegal and never will be. If you wanna argue the publicity clause then that's fair game, but you'd have to wade through the decades of impersonators in voice and physicality first to do that.
Click to expand...
I believe you are not considering that Kai Danzberg not only registered these songs at BMI, but he also listed them on Spotify. This is NOT Fair Use. This is NOT a non-commercial setting.
 
alanram said:
I believe you are not considering that Kai Danzberg not only registered these songs at BMI, but he also listed them on Spotify. This is NOT Fair Use. This is NOT a non-commercial setting.
Click to expand...


And you are the music-police?
Who cares anymore.
These songs were on Spotify under the name KaiMakesMusic for like 2 days..

Again, mind your own business and don’t act like the special officer 👮‍♀️
 
alanram said:
I believe you are not considering that Kai Danzberg not only registered these songs at BMI, but he also listed them on Spotify. This is NOT Fair Use. This is NOT a non-commercial setting.
Click to expand...
Are they still playable on Spotify? Did he not write and compose the songs? Did he register them under his own name? Is Spotify not a free platform?

You said there's no laws about it, so quit whining.
 
This topic is so boring ffs.
AI tracks came out so suddenly that it's currently impossible to talk about them from a legal point of view. But honestly, I don't even care. All I know is that I dig Kai's creations, catchy songs, in full MJ style and it's evident that he spent so much time with the training of the model. At least, compared to the rubbish that goes around on YouTube.

There's worse around the web that is far more morally wrong and illegal than these songs here lmao.
 
alanram said:
I believe you are not considering that Kai Danzberg not only registered these songs at BMI, but he also listed them on Spotify. This is NOT Fair Use. This is NOT a non-commercial setting.
Click to expand...
My brother he literally wrote the tracks. It's like saying "yeah Michael Prince shouldn't be on the Copyrights of Water because Michael Jackson is the one who sings"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top