Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Algorithmic (In)Tolerance: Experimenting with Beethoven’s Music on Social Media Platforms Cover

Algorithmic (In)Tolerance: Experimenting with Beethoven’s Music on Social Media Platforms

Transactions of the International Society for Music Information Retrieval
Volume 6 (2023): Issue 1
By: Adam Eric Berkowitz  
Open Access
|Jan 2023

References

  1. 1Aiva Technologies SARL. (2018). About AIVA. Retrieved November 11, 2022, from https://www.aiva.ai/about#about.
    Back to article
  2. 2Bar-Ziv, S. and Elkin-Koren, N. (2017). Behind the scenes of copyright enforcement: Empirical evidence on notice and takedown. Connecticut Law Review, 50(2), 3–45.
    Back to article
  3. 3Bartholomew, T. B. (2015). The death of Fair Use in cyberspace: YouTube and the problem with Content ID. Duke Law & Technology Review, 13(1), 66–88.
    Back to article
  4. 4Berkowitz, A. E. (2021). Are YouTube and Facebook canceling classical musicians? The harmful effects of automated copyright enforcement on social media platforms. Notes, 78(2), 177–202. DOI: 10.1353/not.2021.0083
    Back to article
  5. 5Berkowitz, A. E. (2022). Classical musicians v. copyright bots: How libraries can aid in the fight. Information Technology and Libraries, 41(2), 1–9. DOI: 10.6017/ital.v41i2.14027
    Back to article
  6. 6Borgsmiller, K. (2019). YouTube vs. the music industry: Are online service providers doing enough to prevent piracy? Southern Illinois University Law Journal, 43, 647–673.
    Back to article
  7. 7Brodeur, M. A. (2020, May 21). Copyright bots and classical musicians are fighting online. The bots are winning. The Washington Post. Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/copyright-bots-and-classical-musicians-are-fighting-online-the-bots-are-winning/2020/05/20/a11e349c-98ae-11ea-89fd-28fb313d1886_story.html.
    Back to article
  8. 8Collins, N. (2018). There is no reason why it should ever stop: Large-scale algorithmic composition. Journal of Creative Music Systems, 3, 1–25. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.667494634199085. DOI: 10.5920/jcms.525
    Back to article
  9. 9Davis, S. M. (2018). Computerized takedowns: A balanced approach to protect fair uses and the rights of copyright owners. Roger Williams University Law Review, 23(1), 229–264.
    Back to article
  10. 10Drott, E. (2021). Copyright, compensation, and commons in the music AI industry. Creative Industries Journal, 14(2), 190–207. DOI: 10.1080/17510694.2020.1839702
    Back to article
  11. 11Endel. (2022). Endel: Personalized soundscapes to help you focus, relax, and sleep. Retrieved November 11, 2022, from https://endel.io/.
    Back to article
  12. 12Goldschmitt, K. E. (2020). The long history of the 2017 Spotify “fake music” scandal. American Music, 38(2), 131–152. DOI: 10.5406/americanmusic.38.2.0131
    Back to article
  13. 13Google. (2018, November). How Google fights piracy. Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://blog.google/documents/27/How_Google_Fights_Piracy_2018.pdf/.
    Back to article
  14. 14Google. (2022a). Copyright strike basics: YouTube. Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2814000#zippy=%2Cwhat-happens-when-you-get-a-copyright-strike%2Cresolve-a-copyright-strike.
    Back to article
  15. 15Google. (2022b). Learn about Content ID claims: YouTube. Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6013276?hl=en&ref_topic=9282678.
    Back to article
  16. 16Gorwa, R., Binns, R., and Katzenbach, C. (2020). Algorithmic content moderation: Technical and political challenges in the automation of platform governance. Big Data & Society, 7(1). DOI: 10.1177/2053951719897945
    Back to article
  17. 17Gray, J. E. and Suzor, N. P. (2020). Playing with machines: Using machine learning to understand automated copyright enforcement at scale. Big Data & Society, 7(1). DOI: 10.1177/2053951720919963
    Back to article
  18. 18Jacques, S., Garstka, K., Hviid, M., and Street, J. (2018). An empirical study of the use of automated anti-piracy systems and their consequences for cultural diversity. SCRIPTed, 15(2), 277–312. DOI: 10.2966/scrip.150218.277
    Back to article
  19. 19Karp, H. (2016, June 28). Industry out of harmony with YouTube on tracking of copyrighted music. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved October 26, 2022, from https://www.wsj.com/articles/industry-out-of-harmony-with-youtube-on-tracking-of-copyrighted-music-1467106213.
    Back to article
  20. 20Kaye, D. B. V. and Gray, J. E. (2021). Copyright gossip: Exploring copyright opinions, theories, and strategies on YouTube. Social Media + Society, 7(3), 1–12. DOI: 10.1177/20563051211036940
    Back to article
  21. 21Keef, A. T. and Ben-Kereth, L. (2016, April 12). Introducing Rights Manager. Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://www.facebook.com/formedia/blog/introducing-rights-manager.
    Back to article
  22. 22Kirke, A. and Miranda, E. R. (2009). A survey of computer systems for expressive music performance. ACM Computing Surveys, 42(1), 1–41. DOI: 10.1145/1592451.1592454
    Back to article
  23. 23Kong, Q., Li, B., Chen, J., and Wang, Y. (2022). GiantMIDI-Piano: A large-scale MIDI dataset for classical piano music. Transactions of the International Society for Music Information Retrieval, 5(1), 87–98. DOI: 10.5334/tismir.80
    Back to article
  24. 24Lawrence-Williams, S. (2022). Regulating automatic content recognition software in Canada. Intellectual Property Journal, 34(3), 317–340.
    Back to article
  25. 25Lester, T. and Pachamanova, D. (2017). The dilemma of false positives: Making Content ID algorithms more conducive to fostering innovative Fair Use in music creation. UCLA Entertainment Law Review, 24(1), 51–73. DOI: 10.5070/LR8241035525
    Back to article
  26. 26Library of Congress and US Copyright Office. (n.d.). Constitution annotated. Retrieved October 28, 2022, from https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-8/clause-8/.
    Back to article
  27. 27Lorenzon, M. (2018, December 20). Why Is Facebook muting classical music videos? ABC Classic FM. Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://www.abc.net.au/classic/read-and-watch/music-reads/facebook-copyright/10633928.
    Back to article
  28. 28Meta. (2022). What tools does Facebook provide to help me protect my intellectual property in my videos? Facebook. Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://www.facebook.com/help/348831205149904.
    Back to article
  29. 29Micchi, G., Bigo, L., Giraud, M., Groult, R., and Levé, F. (2021). I Keep Counting: An experiment in human/AI co-creative songwriting. Transactions of the International Society for Music Information Retrieval, 4(1), pp. 263–275. DOI: 10.5334/tismir.93
    Back to article
  30. 30Morreale, F. (2021). Where does the buck stop? Ethical and political issues with AI in music creation. Transactions of the International Society for Music Information Retrieval, 4(1), 105–113. DOI: 10.5334/tismir.86
    Back to article
  31. 31Perel, M. and Elkin-Koren, N. (2017). Black box tinkering: Beyond disclosure in algorithmic enforcement. Florida Law Review, 69(1), 181–221.
    Back to article
  32. 32Prey, R. (2015). “Now Playing. You”: Big Data and the Production of Music Streaming Space. Dissertation. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC.
    Back to article
  33. 33Quilter, L. and Heins, M. (2007). Intellectual property and free speech in the online world: How educational institutions and other online service providers are coping with cease and desist letters and takedown notices. http://fairusenetwork.org/resources/OSPreport-2007.pdf.
    Back to article
  34. 34Rae, C. (2021). Music Copyright: An Essential Guide for the Digital Age. Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group.
    Back to article
  35. 35Reis, A. J. and Burns, M. L. (2020). Who owns that tune? Issues faced by music creators in today’s content-based industry. Landslide, 12(3). Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://www.americanbar.org/groups/intellectual_property_law/publications/landslide/2019-20/january-february/who-owns-tune-issues-faced-music-creators-todays-contentbased-industry/.
    Back to article
  36. 36Reymond, M. J. (2016). Lenz v Universal Music Group: Much ado about nothing. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 24(2), 119–127. DOI: 10.1093/ijlit/eav021
    Back to article
  37. 37Sanchez Quintana, C., Moreno Arcas, F., Albarracin Molina, D., Fernandez Rodriguez, J. D., and Vico, F. J. (2013). Melomics: A case-study of AI in Spain. AI Magazine, 34(3), 99–103. DOI: 10.1609/aimag.v34i3.2464
    Back to article
  38. 38Seng, D. (2021). Copyrighting copywrongs: An empirical analysis of errors with automated DMCA takedown notices. Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal, 37(2), 119–192.
    Back to article
  39. 39Seng, D. K. B. (2014). The state of the discordant union: An empirical analysis of DMCA takedown notices. Virginia Journal of Law & Technology, 18, 369–428. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2411915
    Back to article
  40. 40Soha, M. and McDowell, Z. J. (2016). Monetizing a meme: YouTube, Content ID, and the Harlem Shake. Social Media + Society, 2(1), 1–12. DOI: 10.1177/2056305115623801
    Back to article
  41. 41Solomon, L. (2015). Fair users or content abusers? The automatic flagging of non-infringing videos by Content ID on YouTube. Hofstra Law Review, 44(1), 237–268.
    Back to article
  42. 42Stim, R. (2019). What is Fair Use: Copyright overview. Retrieved October 30, 2022, from https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/.
    Back to article
  43. 43U.S. Copyright Office. (n.d.a). How long does copyright protection last? Retrieved August 24, 2022, from https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-duration.html.
    Back to article
  44. 44U.S. Copyright Office. (n.d.b). U.S. Copyright Office Fair Use Index. Retrieved October 29, 2022, from https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/.
    Back to article
  45. 45Urban, J. M., Karaganis, J., and Schofield, B. L. (2017). Notice and Takedown in Everyday Practice. BerkeleyLaw, University of California, and American Assembly, University of Columbia. DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/59m86
    Back to article
  46. 46Urban, J. M. and Quilter, L. (2006). Efficient process or chilling effects: Takedown notices under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal, 22(4), 621–693. DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/pyzua
    Back to article
  47. 47Zapata-Kim, L. (2016). Should YouTube’s Content ID be liable for misrepresentation under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act? Boston College Law Review, 57(5), 1847–1874.
    Back to article
  48. 48Zhang, D. Y., Badilla, J., Tong, H., and Wang, D. (2018). An end-to-end scalable copyright detection system for online video sharing platforms. In IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), 626–629. DOI: 10.1109/ASONAM.2018.8508288
    Back to article
  49. 49Zhang, D. Y., Li, Q., Tong, H., Badilla, J., Zhang, Y., and Wang, D. (2018). Crowdsourcing-based copyright infringement detection in live video streams. In IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), 367–374. DOI: 10.1109/ASONAM.2018.8508523
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/tismir.148 | Journal eISSN: 2514-3298
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Aug 26, 2022
Accepted on: Nov 27, 2022
Published on: Jan 3, 2023
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
social media,
public domain,
fair use,
copyright,
algorithmic moderation,
digital rights management

© 2023 Adam Eric Berkowitz, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 6 (2023): Issue 1Next article