Fans are expressing their concerns after The Pokémon Company seemingly used fan-created music in a recent trailer for the Pokémon Scarlet & Violet DLC, The Hidden Treasure of Area Zero. The uproar began shortly after today’s Pokémon Presents wrapped up. While many tuned in for updates on things like Detective Pikachu Returns and the aforementioned add-on content, musician NightDefined (a.k.a. ND) noticed that some of the footage featured music they created. In many cases, it might be an honor for a fan to see their Pokemon fan music creation used by a company they admire, but for ND, it was also a surprise.

  • Disgusted_Tadpole@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    1 year ago

    If someone would use in a Yt video 0,001 ms of a Pokémon sound, Nintendo would sue the guy, kidnap his family, kill the hamster and shit on the bed.

  • Elkenders@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    I work in music/licensing and this puts them in a very sticky situation. The laws around this are pretty set in stone. There will be a fair whack of cash changing hands I imagine.

    • RickRussell_CA@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t worry, in a few years, they’ll just use an AI trained on copyrighted music to write an “original” score, declaring the training inputs to be “fair use” and the output to be “transformative”, and all those pesky concerns about licensing will go away.

      As well as a fair whack of cash.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        they’ll just use an AI trained on copyrighted music to write an “original” score, declaring the training inputs to be “fair use” and the output to be “transformative”

        Isn’t this essentially what humans do, too? Music isn’t created in a vacuum; it’s inspired by prior work. I guess the difference is that the AI won’t ask for royalties.

        • Pigeon@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          LLM AI isn’t creative enough to do anything more than straightforward copying. At best, it can copy two or more things at once and combine them, or apply a basic aesthetic/edit something to be visually “in the style of” a particular artist, sort of, kind of, not really. It can’t be do anything with the meaning or intent of a work, or “be inspired” to create anything markedly new.

          Like. Regular old human plagiarists often claim to just be “inspired by” too, even if they just gave a story a new coat of paint and changed character names and reworded some sentences. That’s the level LLM’s are at.

          LLM’s can be straight up directed to copy particular artist’s styles, too. Which it knows how to do (badly) because it scraped their works without permission or payment. People use midjourney like this all the time.

        • Alto@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’d be a great comparison if AI weren’t able to absorb and retain many, many orders of magnitude more information than humans can

    • gamer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      That would be very entertaining, but anyone who is fanatical enough to make pokemon fan music probably wouldn’t dream of causing their favorite company harm.

        • Dr Cog@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Which they would definitely win.

          Even if it’s based on the existing song, parody and sampling precedent make it clearly free use. However the creator definitely owns copyright on the specific creation.

          • phi1997@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Even if they would, look what at happened to Bleem. They successfully argued in court that the PS1 emulator they were selling was legal, but Sony kept suing them until Bleem went bankrupt paying legal fees. That was an actual corporation, too. What hope does an individual artist have?

            • Dr Cog@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              While you have a point, the emulator scene is untested and legally dubious.

              There is nothing dubious about copyright infringement. Doing what Sony did would easily be considered abusing the legal system and no judge would stand for it.

  • WookieMunster@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    The Pokémon company and Nintendo are such anti consumer garbage companies that hate and punish their users and their fans say thank you