A new virtual act, “The Velvet Sundown,” has emerged, crafted not by human hands alone, but through the power of artificial intelligence. This project, born from the generative AI program Suno, raises a fundamental question: what happens when art is no longer solely a product of the human spirit?
The question isn’t simply about creation, but about the very soul of artistry. Trina Belamide, a leading figure in the Filipino music industry, argues that programs like Suno reduce art to a mere commodity. She believes the struggle inherent in the creative process isn’t a burden, but the very essence of what artists cherish – the joy of building something from nothing.
Yet, dismissing AI entirely isn’t the answer. Cultural writer and musician Mariah Reodica advocates for demystifying the technology, viewing it as a tool, albeit an imperfect one. While AI can efficiently handle tasks like data analysis, it consistently requires human validation, a guiding hand to ensure quality and meaning.
The core issue, Reodica suggests, isn’t the technology itself, but our perception of it. We must move beyond the label “artificial intelligence” and understand its true nature. This requires a collaborative dialogue – artists, digital rights advocates, policymakers, and educators all working together to navigate this new landscape.
Award-winning screenwriter Ricky Lee emphasizes a crucial distinction: human stories cultivate empathy, a quality AI simply cannot replicate. He believes our unique voice, our conscious storytelling, and the nuances between words are irreplaceable. AI is a tool, yes, but one that must remain under human control.
The dangers of unchecked AI are already visible. Social media is flooded with AI-generated videos designed to spread misinformation, mimicking human emotions to manipulate and deceive. Subtle clues – watermarks, distorted text, unnatural movements – often betray their artificial origins, though these imperfections are rapidly disappearing.
However, for artists like Christina Lopez, AI can be integrated thoughtfully, much like a DJ samples music or a chef uses pre-made ingredients. It’s a component, not the creation itself. Her work isn’t defined by the AI, but by the artistic vision that guides its use.
A key factor in navigating this evolving world is the rise of open-source software. Unlike profit-driven companies, open-source platforms prioritize creators and digital rights, offering transparency and control. This contrasts sharply with the data-hungry practices of tech giants like OpenAI and X.
The shift from artist-centered to profit-centered AI development is deeply concerning. Lopez recalls a time when artists could train their own models, but the acquisition of tools like Style GAN by corporations effectively shut down that possibility, raising questions about intellectual property and artistic ownership.
This has led to a growing optimism around smaller, community-based software, built by and for creators. The focus is shifting towards valuing freedom, agency, and accessibility in artistic expression, rather than simply chasing technological advancements.
Musician Myke Salomon believes that condemning AI use outright is counterproductive. Instead, he advocates for regulation and ethical application. He understands the appeal of AI as a tool, drawing parallels to his own early use of computers in composition.
Current copyright law in the Philippines offers some clarity: only a human being can be considered the author of a copyrighted work. AI, as a non-human entity, cannot claim authorship. However, the legal framework struggles to address the complexities of human-AI collaboration.
The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) is actively developing an AI strategy, recognizing the need to balance technological progress with existing legal protections. Copyright registrations are at a record high, signaling a growing awareness of intellectual property rights.
Lopez urges IPOPHL to avoid simply reacting to technology, and instead focus on proactive solutions. She also highlights the need for labor laws to protect the creatives who provide the “fuel” for AI-generated content, ensuring they are fairly compensated.
Ultimately, the concern isn’t just about devaluation of creativity, but about the market-driven forces shaping AI development. Reodica concludes that understanding AI is paramount – not through fear or blind acceptance, but through informed engagement. Only then can we harness its potential to serve, rather than diminish, the human spirit.
