Turn---licensing hurts creativity.

And while some small and independent creators are on the frontlines of the fight against GAI right now, it is important to remember that there are, and always have been, significant inequalities in what work is valued, whose work is respected, and who will have the power and resources to aggressively defend their work. For instance, hip-hop music was initially criticized for its use of sampling from other artists’ work and faced repeated copyright challenges which restricted the right of artists to use samples without paying for licenses. Anti-sampling cases resulting in mandatory licensing transformed a counter-cultural, democratized, method of making art into yet another tool that only established artists and record labels could leverage. Today, underground hip-hop artists using uncleared samples and mashup artists still find themselves locked out of key revenue streams like streaming platforms because of these restrictive copyright rules.

There are obvious parallels between sampling and artists using GAI tools today, but even artists working traditionally ought to consider how existing industry power dynamics would play out if there were vastly expanded “stylistic” copyright rules. Record labels, music studios, and established artists would have the resources and power to go after any creator that encroached on their “style,” potentially locking up whole genres and aesthetics behind licensing structures. Reducing every shred of human originality to copyrightable units that must be bought and sold is a far greater threat to creativity than new automated tools will ever be.