Exclusive: How is Blockchain Disrupting the Music Industry Globally?

With the widespread of blockchain technology used in different industries in the past decade, Sean Jong from K-Tune in Korea explains how blockchain can address the current pain points in the traditional music industry. He also explains the role of blockchain in royalty distribution and copyright infringement!

What are the pain points in the music industry and how can blockchain be used to solve them?

There is a range of areas that blockchain technology can help improve the music industry. For instance, reducing transactional costs in the conventional and traditional music industry would be a major improvement. In the traditional methods, if you want to make music, you have to meet professionals from the industry and settle on the royalty shares. For instance, if I were more involved in the development of music then I would claim for 80% of the shares while the other party gets 20%. In the process of doing this involves a lot of intermediaries such as copyright agencies or even lawyers.

Thanks to the nature of blockchain technology, it would be very difficult or virtually impossible to infringe or manipulate data; therefore you will not need to use intermediaries as you can settle and write the division of shares and consensus with other parties on the blockchain.

What is royalty distribution and why is it important?

There are two phases, the first phase of royalty distribution is when they’re making music together, they have to reach a consensus of the division of shares. In the music industry, it is hard to pinpoint, you know, who’s your, what’s your job, and what’s mine. Roles in the music industry are quite arbitrary and hard to pinpoint from the royalty shares perspective. In short, the first stage is to make a consensus between artists.

The second phase is when the music is being sold and release that how to collect the royalties, from streaming companies such as iTunes, Spotify, Pandora or Melon in Korea. Blockchain technology has not been yet adopted around the second phase. A solution has not be found for the second phase but we can take care of at least the first phase of royalty sharing because between artists they must come to a conclusion or a consensus of who owns how many shares. Once they have reached a consensus, conventionally, they have to go to an authority or intermediary and report it. With the use of blockchain technology, artists involved will be able to come to a consensus and write it on the blockchain, and that’s the K-Tune solution.

How can blockchain address the copyright infringement issue in the music industry?

Copyright infringement happens most of the time when music is downloaded illegally. So far with the given technology, no one will be able to track every device that everybody owns. The role of blockchain technology could step in regarding copyright infringement when it comes to streaming engines as it can at least track which song is being played, the number of times being played and this data cannot be manipulated.

How are you encouraging more artists to use K-Tune and how has it been adopted in Korea and across the world?

In Korea, it is at a very nascent stage and not many people know about blockchain technology nor do they understand it. Since I am representing K-Tune, I believe it can be one of the pioneers who can spearhead the market awareness and public education of what blockchain is and how blockchain can disrupt the creative industry. I believe the awareness and the level of understanding will keep growing, we have just started our first step, not only in Korea, but also worldwide.

US Television Network Provider Dish Aims to Track and Stop Piracy Using New Blockchain Systems

The Dish Network Corporation is a US television network provider based in Colorado, with over 16,000 employees and 9.5 million subscribers across all of America.

In recent years with subscribers moving to newer forms of media, including internet-based streaming services such as Netflix, Dish has struggled to maintain its customer base, with 381,000 subscribers lost in 2018’s Q4. 

In this multi-facet battle against internet-based competitors streaming services DirecTV and cable television providers as well as illegal activity, Dish has applied to patent a system which allows content to be stored and updated using a distributed ledger, introducing new features and better means to protect the security of their network and rights.

This anti-privacy system would use blockchain to embed user data, granting access to verified users, storing names, contact information, and other ownership rights to ensure video and audio rights are not distributed to unauthorized third parties. 

Efficiently checking copyright has been a struggle for all forms of media in the digital age, however, with this new form of tracking possible in distributed ledger technology, companies are increasingly testing blockchain to win against piracy finally.  

Over the past few years, Dish has been in legal action filling two separate lawsuits against platforms redistributing content illegally, winning a $90 million sum in damages dispute earlier in 2018. 

In response, Dish has been searching for new technologies to improve numbers, with blockchain seemingly the answer.

It is unclear if Dish will create their own blockchain, or use an existing platform, such as Bitcoin or Ethereum, due to time and resources being a significant factor. However, with blockchains potential to enforce copyright, it may be the exact answer to the company’s problems.

Many other companies have reported investigating blockchain for all types of services in digital technology. 

Image via Shutterstock

Japanese Advertiser Dentsu Offers Influential Manga Comic Critics Blockchain Rewards

Japanese advertising behemoth, Dentsu has partnered with Kadowkawa ASCII Research Labs to help local content creators on popular streaming apps to gain recognition and have their work critiqued by the public.

According to an article on April 20 by Nikkei, the partnership centres around establishing a Proof of Concept (POC) for rewards to independent content creator using blockchain. The goal is to offer blockchain rewards to popular commentators of Japanese Manga comics who leverage the livestream apps.

Japanese Manga Has Some Copyright Issues

Manga comics are synonymous with Japanese culture but the famous art form has its own copyright issues. Japanese consumers often sell on comics and some books are sold on multiple times especially if they are collectible, however the author only receives commission on the first sale.

The popularity of these comics has fostered a rich history of secondary creators, fans who often create content based on original works of anime, manga and their central characters. While the intentions of these creators are usually to express their appreciation or love for a comic, copyright laws are often breached especially when it comes to some manga commentary videos.

Dentsu and Kadokawa aim to make it easier for people using livestream with potentially copyrighted material by using blockchain. The partnership is designed to explain the range of allowed materials on these platforms to these secondary and even tertiary creators.

“We want to incorporate the activities of fans that have not been converted into monetary value into the legitimate content market,” said Junichi Suzuki, who is heading the blockchain trial at Dentsu.

Japan’s government has shown a heightened interest in preserving their own content. The Ministry of Economy,Trade and Industry in Japan also set up program in 2019 with the aim of providing companies with an interest in managing Japanese creator content using blockchain up to half a million USD.

Brock Pierce and Blockchain Capital Sue Florida-Based Company for Copyright Infringement

Brock Pierce and his business partners are suing Blockchain Capital Management LLC (BCM) for copyright infringement.

Together with Bart Stephens and Bradford Stephens, Brock Pierce co-founded Blockchain Capital in 2013. Blockchain Capital filed a complaint with the District Court of Florida against Blockchain Capital Management LLC for using the same name to conduct business. Though the latter thrived mainly in the financial sector, plaintiffs said that operating under the same name would bring about confusion in official documents and day-to-day transactions.

In the complaint, Blockchain Capital expressed that it would like BCM to remove Blockchain Capital from its title, as it was an infringement on the venture capital firm’s trademark. It also said that BCM and its founder Fareed Ifthikar had not responded to the venture capital company’s requests or to its letters, and consequently this led to the firm seeking legal action.

The San-Francisco based company is said to be one of the oldest blockchain venture firms in its industry, with a $13 million investment fund for Bitcoin (BTC) and more than 70 blockchain projects under its management. Through an initial coin offering (ICO), the company also managed to raise $150 million in 2018 as well.

It has been speculated that BCM will likely comply with Blockchain Capital’s requests, but at the time of writing, official details are still in the works.

Brock Pierce for President

Co-founder of Blockchain Capital—Brock Pierce—is a presidential hopeful and had previously announced his intentions to run as an Independent candidate in the 2020 US elections. Brock Pierce is a known venture capitalist and is reputed for being a successful entrepreneur, pioneering the market for cryptocurrency all the while. He has successfully raised more than $5 billion for venture capital firms he took under his wing. Speaking about his aspirations during his campaign announcement, Brock Pierce had said:

“Entrepreneurs are essential to the rebuilding of this nation that we love, and I’m running in this race because I know that together we can help build a pathway towards the rebirth of the America we love so much.”

Recently, the Blockchain Capital co-founder announced that he had recruited Akon as a chief strategist for his presidential campaign run. The Grammy-nominated artist is also quite a crypto pioneer himself, as he is working on building a cryptocurrency-run city in Senegal, dubbed Akon City.

Facebook's Rebranding of Libra Stablecoin to Diem May Face Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

Facebook’s idea to rebrand its Libra stablecoin project to “Diem” may not be as smooth sailing as what the corporate firm had in mind.

Why Facebook may be sued

It turns out that Diem has already been taken up as a name, and it belongs to a budding fintech firm based in Europe. Founder of the fintech firm Diem, Geri Cupi, shared:

“We were flabbergasted on 1st December to find that Facebook’s Libra Foundation had chosen to rebrand to Diem…As a small startup, we are concerned that customer confusion resulting from Libra’s actions will significantly impact our growth.”

Cupi referred to Facebook’s recent move to rebrand its digital currency project to Diem. The purpose of this was to get a better chance of getting approved by regulatory authorities. The announcement was made on December 1 by Facebook, as previously, Libra faced many regulatory issues that prevented the successful launch of its native token.

Now, it turns out that Diem has already been taken up as a name and Facebook may be threatened with a copyright infringement lawsuit. The decision to sue Facebook is not an easy one to make, as the tech company may easily crush counter-rivals with its monopoly.

Diem fintech firm is also a startup, having only soft-launched in October. However, despite its new entry into the fintech industry, its social handle @diemglobal has already hit 469K followers on Instagram.

Addressing the hefty task of being legally matched with Facebook, Chris Adelsbach, a renowned Diem investor, said that it was not an easy decision to make. He shared with Sifted:

“We thought, ‘do we concede and just say ‘we’re a small company,’ or do we fight for what’s right.”

He hinted that Facebook may have used its monopoly over the tech industry to overlook the fact that Diem as a name had already been taken. He said:

“It wouldn’t take that much effort for Facebook to find out if there’s another Diem in financial services. They obviously took the view that ‘we can just crush them, we’re Facebook.”

Diem’s first move is to send Facebook a cease and desist letter.

Big Tech Grilled by US Congress

This is not the first time that Facebook comes under fire by other companies for trademark infringement. Previously, many regulatory bodies, including the US Congress, had placed Big Tech – Amazon, Apple, Google, and Facebook – under antitrust hearings for questionable practices the corporations have resorted to.

The US Congress has been trying to regulate the monopoly established by the tech giants and to oblige them to follow anti-competitive clauses, the dominance of the Big Tech has enabled them to “engage in a form of their own private quasi regulation that is unaccountable to anyone but themselves.”

EU to Regulate AI Use of Copyrighted Material

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in content creation has led to controversies regarding its use of copyrighted material. In response, the European Union (EU) has passed a draft bill aimed at regulating the use of AI tools in such scenarios. The bill is part of the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act and was proposed as draft rules almost two years ago.

The new bill will classify AI tools according to their risk level, ranging from minimal and limited to unacceptable. High-risk tools will not be banned outright but will be subjected to stricter transparency procedures. The bill will also oblige generative AI tools, including ChatGPT and Midjourney, to disclose any use of copyrighted materials in AI training.

The legislation has been seen as a middle ground between too much surveillance and over-regulation that protects citizens while also fostering innovation and boosting the economy. Svenja Hahn, a member of the European Parliament, commented on the bill’s current status, stating that it strikes a balance between protecting citizens and fostering innovation.

The use of AI in the financial industry was also discussed in the latest edition of Eurofi, a European think tank composed of enterprises in the public and private sectors. The publication included a section on AI and machine learning applications in finance in the EU, which included five mini-essays on AI innovation and regulation within the EU. All of the essays touched on the upcoming Artificial Intelligence Act.

Georgina Bulkeley, the director for EMEA financial services solutions at Google Cloud, stated that AI is too important not to regulate and that it is too important not to regulate well. These developments come after the EU’s data watchdog expressed concerns about potential issues that AI companies in the United States may face if they do not comply with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulations.

In conclusion, the EU’s move to regulate AI use of copyrighted material is an attempt to strike a balance between protecting citizens and fostering innovation. With the increasing use of AI in various industries, it is important to have regulations in place to ensure that AI tools are used ethically and responsibly.

EU Drafts AI Bill to Address Copyright Concerns

Concerns over the usage of copyrighted material have risen to the forefront as the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the production of content becomes more commonplace. In response to these concerns, legislators in the European Union have approved a draft law with the intention of regulating both the firms that produce the technology and the technology itself.

The law, which is a component of the Artificial Intelligence Act of the EU, intends to categorize AI technologies according to the amount of danger they pose. The risk categories range from acceptable to unacceptable, with unacceptable being the highest. The use of high-risk instruments won’t be completely outlawed, but rather they’ll be subject to more stringent disclosure rules. It will soon be necessary for generative AI tools such as ChatGPT and Midjourney, among others, to report any usage of copyrighted resources made in the course of their AI training.

During the subsequent phase of debates among the legislatures and member states, the particulars of the law will be refined to their final form. According to Svenja Hahn, a member of the European Parliament, the bill in its current form strikes a balance between excessive levels of monitoring and excessive levels of regulation. This balance protects people while also encouraging innovation and contributing to economic growth.

The data watchdog for the European Union has voiced worry about the possible difficulties that artificial intelligence (AI) businesses in the United States may have if they do not comply with the General Data Protection Regulations.

Additionally, the European think tank known as Eurofi, which is comprised of organizations from both the public and private sectors, has published a magazine that features an entire section devoted to the applications of AI and machine learning in the financial sector of the EU. All of the mini-essays featured in this section touched on the forthcoming Artificial Intelligence Act in some way. They were on the topic of artificial intelligence (AI) innovation and regulation inside the EU, namely for usage in the financial sector.

One of the authors, Georgina Bulkeley, who is also the director for EMEA financial services solutions at Google Cloud, stressed the significance of AI regulation by stating that the technology is “too vital not to regulate. In addition to this, it is of insufficient significance to not properly regulate.”

In general, the proposed legislation represents a substantial advance toward the goal of regulating the use of AI and works protected by copyright in the EU. As the technology continues to improve and become more widespread in a variety of sectors, it is essential to ensure that it is used in a transparent and ethical manner in order to safeguard both customers and companies.

AI-Generated Artwork Not Eligible for Copyright, US District Judge Rules

In a landmark decision on August 18, 2023, US District Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled that artwork generated solely by artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be copyrighted. The ruling was made in response to a lawsuit against the US Copyright Office, which had previously denied a copyright request by Stephen Thaler for an image produced using his Creativity Machine algorithm.

The ruling made by Judge Howell stressed the fundamental premise of copyright law by noting that it has “never been granted to work that was ‘absent any guiding human hand'” and that “human authorship is a bedrock requirement of copyright.” Both of these statements were made in reference to the fact that copyright has “never been granted to work that was ‘absent any guiding human hand.'” Even if technological advancements are constantly being made, this viewpoint is consistent with the position taken by the United States Copyright Office, which maintains that the only “works of human creation” are entitled to legal protection under copyright laws.

The case received a lot of attention as a result of Thaler’s repeated efforts to register the AI-generated picture “as a work-for-hire to the owner of the Creativity Machine.” If this had been effective, it would have acknowledged the AI as the author while allowing Thaler to keep ownership of the work. However, none of his endeavors were successful since they were all greeted with failure.

Attorney Ryan Abbot of Brown Neri Smith & Khan LLP, who represents Stephen Thaler, has said that he disagrees with the court’s reading of the Copyright Act and suggested that an appeal of the verdict would be filed.

This judgement highlights the ongoing dispute around AI and copyright law, which is especially relevant given that AI is continuing to play an increasingly important role in creative sectors. As artificial intelligence (AI) technology progress and their applications in art and other industries increase, it is expected that the legal environment will encounter further obstacles and evolve as a result.

For now, the message is clear: while AI can be a tool for creation, the human element remains central to the concept of copyright in the United States.

Steamboat Willie Enters Public Domain, Inspires NFT and Meme Coin Craze

As the calendar turned to 2024, a significant event in the world of digital art and copyright law occurred. The original version of Mickey Mouse, as seen in the 1928 short film “Steamboat Willie,” officially entered the public domain. This development marked the end of the Walt Disney Company’s copyright claim over this specific version of one of the most iconic characters in animation history. The United States law restricts copyright to a lifespan of 95 years, bringing Steamboat Willie into the public domain after nearly a century.

The Rise of Steamboat Willie NFTs

Following this event, a remarkable surge in the popularity of nonfungible tokens (NFTs) related to Steamboat Willie was observed. Three specific NFT collections, namely “Steamboat Willie Public Domain 2024,” “Steamboat Willie,” and “Steamboat Willie’s Riverboat,” quickly ascended to the top spots on OpenSea’s 24-hour trending list. The “Steamboat Willie Public Domain 2024” collection garnered significant attention, achieving around $1.2 million in trading volume and securing the number one position. Furthermore, this collection also ranked sixth on OpenSea’s 24-hour top charts, a notable achievement considering the presence of other popular collections like the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) and Pudgy Penguins​​.

Disney’s Response

Disney, in response to the expiration of the copyright for Steamboat Willie, emphasized that modern interpretations of Mickey Mouse remain protected under copyright law. A spokesperson for Disney highlighted their commitment to safeguarding their rights in these modern versions and warned against potential consumer confusion due to unauthorized uses of the character​​.

Mickey Mouse Meme Coins

The entry of Steamboat Willie into the public domain not only sparked a trend in NFTs but also led to the creation of meme coins featuring the character. Crypto enthusiasts swiftly capitalized on this development, minting digital tokens and meme coins to commemorate the occasion. This movement represents a significant shift in the digital representation of cultural icons, as these tokens and coins symbolize a new chapter in the digital art world. Additionally, a dedicated website for “Mickey Token” was launched, offering crypto products related to this famed Disney icon​​.

OpenAI Dismisses NYT Copyright Lawsuit as Baseless Amid Rising Legal Challenges

OpenAI, a leading artificial intelligence research lab, has dismissed a copyright lawsuit filed by The New York Times (NYT) as “without merit.” The lawsuit, which was brought to light by the NYT, accuses OpenAI of using the newspaper’s content for training its AI chatbots, such as GPT-4 and DALL-E 3, without authorization. This move by the NYT represents a significant challenge in the rapidly evolving landscape of AI and copyright law.

In December 2023, the NYT filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging that the companies used the Times’ copyrighted content to train their generative AI models. The suit, which has become a major talking point in the AI community, claims that this action was taken without permission or payment, potentially causing billions of dollars in damages to the NYT.

OpenAI, however, has countered these allegations. In a public response, OpenAI reiterated its stance that training AI models using publicly available data, including articles from the NYT, falls under fair use. The company argues that this approach is essential for innovation and competitiveness in the U.S. OpenAI also addressed the issue of “regurgitation,” where AI models output training data verbatim, stating that this is less likely with data from a single source and that it’s the users’ responsibility to avoid intentional misuse of the models.

Interestingly, OpenAI has been in constructive discussions with the NYT about forming a partnership. These talks were progressing well until the lawsuit was filed, which came as a surprise to OpenAI. The company believes that this legal action is not representative of the typical use or intent of its AI models and sees this as an opportunity to clarify its business practices and technology development.

The NYT lawsuit is part of a growing trend where content creators, including artists and journalists, are challenging the use of their work in training AI systems. Other lawsuits have been filed against OpenAI and similar companies, accusing them of copyright infringement. This legal pushback signifies a broader concern over the ethical and legal implications of AI in the creative and media industries.

Notably, some news organizations have chosen a different path, forming licensing agreements with AI companies. The Associated Press and Axel Springer, for example, have entered into deals with OpenAI, indicating a potential collaborative approach to address these challenges. However, these agreements are often for relatively small sums, especially considering the revenues of AI companies like OpenAI.

The lawsuit and the issues it raises about AI and copyright law are set to be a pivotal moment in defining the boundaries and responsibilities of AI developers and content creators. As the case unfolds, it will undoubtedly have significant implications for the future of AI, journalism, and intellectual property rights.

Exit mobile version