No. I get why. I'm just saying that it's morally equivalent to use copyrighted music to train AI generated music, as it is to use copyrighted art to generate ar

No. I get why. I'm just saying that it's morally equivalent to use copyrighted music to train AI generated music, as it is to use copyrighted art to generate art. > Dance Diffusion is also built on datasets composed entirely of copyright-free and voluntarily provided music and audio samples. Because diffusion models are prone to memorization and overfitting, releasing a model trained on copyrighted data could potentially result in legal issues. In honoring the intellectual property of artists while also complying to the best of their ability with the often strict copyright standards of the music industry, keeping any kind of copyrighted material out of training data was a must. Reads very different to any statement made by Hugginface or the LION database regarding stable diffusion, which do not mention the concept of an artist or artist work a single time. And Hugginface are the only ones open about it. Midjourney and Dall-E and Imagen most assuredly doing the same for their black boxes.