Submitted 4 months ago by gedaliyah@lemmy.world to mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vh4ErO-i5o
A musical mash up of Johnny Cash and Barbie Girl, created by YouTuber There I Ruined It, was played for Congress in a bad example of AI threats.
Man, i feel like getting your content brought before congress is almost as much of an achievement as getting a weird al parody
There I Ruined It only uses AI to change his voice so it sounds like the artist he’s parodying (and a small amount of auto-tune) – 99% of the vocal performance real human singing.
The video’s maker claims this is parody but seems more like just satire with receives less legal protections typically. It doesn’t seem that there’s any commentary on the work original IPs, given the rest of his body of work.
It’s straight up parody. It’s a composition in the style of Johnny Cash that’s meant to be funny. That’s parody.
See: Weird Al’s polka medleys.
He’s got years of this under his belt. His whole career is based on this.
I think There I Ruined It is going to be fine.
It’s a composition in the style of Johnny Cash that’s meant to be funny. That’s parody.
That’s satire. In the US for something to be parody it has to be a commentary on the original work(s) or author(s). A parody of Johnny Cash would be something like if they used AI to copy his song note for note but had lyrics that criticized him for portraying himself as bluecollar in his music despite his wealth.
Parody receives higher protection than satire because the parodist is actually trying to make a statement. Most “music parody” like that of Weird Al is satire, which is why Weird Al asks for permission from the original artists.
I love your work!
But would you be willing to make the sacrifice, if it means we can get autotune and beauty filters made illegal?
eager_eagle@lemmy.world 4 months ago
lmao