The Music Modernization Act, passed just five years ago, could quickly become obsolete amid the growing threat of artificial intelligence (AI), lawmakers and music industry figures said at a hearing in Nashville on Tuesday.
“If we don’t get AI right, it could very well render not only the Music Modernization Act obsolete – but also the policy choices we make next. The stakes could hardly be higher,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) wrote in an op-ed ahead of the hearing.
Issa, who chairs the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, convened the hearing featuring music executives, musicians and songwriters.
Congress passed the Orrin G. Hatch-Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act (MMA) in 2018 with the intention of making both statutory licensing and royalty distribution more fair and efficient for creators and digital music providers.
David Porter, a producer and hall-of-fame songwriter, said the MMA was a success in a lot of ways.
“Whether you’re a music creator or a legislator, the goal is to make something worthwhile that will endure and change lives,” Porter said. “And that’s exactly what the MMA has done.”
For one, it created the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC) to streamline digital royalties for songwriters. Porter added that the Classics Protection and Access Act, part of the MMA, also allowed creators to collect royalties when music they made before 1972 was streamed.
However, as the music industry evolves, so too must the legislation protecting artists and their work, he said.
“Today, huge AI computer models are copying and analyzing virtually all of the music ever made to generate what they are calling ‘new’ songs from the music of yesterday,” Porter said. “To have someone — or something — take my voice, my sound, my persona without permission and manipulate it or mimic my work is a personal violation and a threat to the good I’ve built up over the years.”
“How is that new?” he asked.
Though Porter said he is more than happy to let others sample his music when they ask permission, no AI company has reached out to him for the rights to his music.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) asked the witnesses what Congress can do to address the challenges that AI presents for creative industries.
Abby North, president of North Music Group, proposed legislating a new model to compensate creators for any derivatives of their work that are created by AI technology — including sound recordings that are used to train AI models.
Michael Molinar, general manager of Big Machine Music, concurred.
“I saw an operation that had spit out songs in the style of songwriter Hall of Fame Liz Rose,” Molinar said. “In order to be able to write like her the computer must have been fed her songs. That should not go on unlicensed, nor should it be uncompensated to Miss Rose.”
Award-winning songwriter, producer, and musician Daniel Tashian noted that smart technology can be used to benefit musicians as well, such as an algorithm used with Cher’s 1998 hit “Believe” to determine what pitch the song should be in.
Porter agreed that while there is a place for AI in the music industry, it’s currently headed down a dangerous path.
“It’s not just a threat to existing works but to future generations of artists and to culture itself,” Porter said. “If all we have is machine-made music copied from existing works, there will be less and less creativity, artistry, and soul to go around. What a penalty to put on future generations.”
Congress and the courts need to enact guardrails that protect both creators and their work, he added.
However, Tashian argued that AI is still far away from competing with musicians for producing compelling music.
“I’ve yet to sort of experience an artwork created by a computer that gives me goosebumps or gives me chills, because it’s so beautiful,” Tashian said. “So until that happens, I’m just going to keep my head down and keep doing my best organic music and using computers when they can help.”