Yeah.

You know, I've noticed something that music is an interesting amalgamation of two industries, non-for-profit and for-profit.

It's so interesting how we see our artists like we want to support them as if it were a cause, as if it were a, you know, but at the same time, they are a business.

So it's just an interesting realm.

I used to go to our fundraising for charities.

And I understand the psychology of why people donate and want to support.

And it's so interesting that a fan is both supporting them as a charity, but at the same time, it's a business.

Oh, how many people actually heard it? How many people bought the song direct, right? So these are the things we have to kind of hone in a bit more and to gain some understanding but i'm curious on all y'all takes on it

what would dolly do definitely has a nice ring to it yeah

doesn't it what would dolly do Yeah, it takes a lot of self-belief to turn down Elvis Presley.

A lot of self-belief.

You know, she clearly had a vision.

She understood her value.

And I think a lot of times as independent artists, especially in the beginning, we're like, what is my value? We're waiting for other people to come and tell us how valuable we are.

Rather than us checking in on... really like all the hard work we've already done, all the years we've spent mastering our craft and really looking around to see the spirit of what our music has kind of done in the culture, in the grand scheme of things.

I feel like this is a battle probably that should be for indie platforms like Universal, Warner and Sony, as they're the ones who are actually supplying this training data to the AI companies.

Hmm.

Yeah, I think we're all just confused.

What should we do about this AI thing? It's new, it's real, and it's happening.

No one seems to agree on what should we all do on this.

We need to have an industry-wide definition.

And I feel like everybody has their own opinion, right, Chris? Everybody has their own opinion.

I personally think there's a difference between AI did this and AI touched this somewhere.

What would have to be an around-hill outcome for a working songwriter to actually see a change?

But also, it seems like the fact that we'd like no one opted in for all the prior use, seems like there's still a missing link there.

Yeah, that is the elephant in the room, man.

You didn't have my consent before.

That's the elephant in the room.

I think, you know, I'm pro-licensing, man.

It's all cool, you know.

But did you have my consent? You didn't ask me to use, you know, the music to train the AI.

So at what point does quote unquote fair compensation have to become a percentage?

I just think that might be a mistake.

Well, here's my take, Chris.

As time goes on, we know that AI is not stopping.

It's not stopping.

It's going to get bigger and bigger and bigger.

I think that as time goes on, I like that people know, hey, this was generated with AI.

What's so wrong about that? With being transparent, what's so wrong about that? In fact, as time goes by, the fact that we know something was created by humans might actually make it more valuable in and of itself.

I think that's a really interesting new thing for artists to play in.

What if, for you as an artist, every stream for the, uh, first 72 hours was worth way more money because it was quality streams? How hard would you be fighting to get people into that inner circle or be able to foster that relationship with those quality streams versus the people who are just sort of there on playlists getting free stuff?

No, but I feel like this is sort of a chicken-and-egg scenario, because on one hand, the only people who care about exclusivity are the people who already care about you.

So, like if Taylor Swift, you know, were to do some- a business move like this, "Hey, for my paid subscribers, my paid Swifties, you know, you get access to the song and the album 72 hours before everyone else, and but y- you're under, like, a, a monthly membership, Swiftie membership," um, 50 or $100 a month or whatever.

I, I don't know.

Uh, it comes down to, like, demand at that point.

I feel like it's a good move for her, but how can we do this for an artist that has no fan base, or they have a very small fan base and, and no demand? Like, this is a chicken-and-egg scenario, so maybe this is a question for, for Jared maybe.

You know? 'Cause you're the ads guy.

And so I think that that would be something to explore.

So I guess I'm, I'm, I'm curious, um, what does that, what does that say, you know, about, uh, you know, the power of music overall and, uh, the, and the ability f- to have these cultural moments? Um, is there a way that we, that, uh, indie artists can, you know, leverage, you know, those types of opportunities to, you know, to get music heard? Or is this kind of thing only work because of the fact that this was such a big hit in the past, and so bringing it back kind of creates that cultural moment?

You know what? I, I, I, I wanna chime in and, and, and say that this reminds me of the only thing that truly matters.

Like, when something like this happens, and it happens all the time, you know? But when something like this happens, it reminds me that there's only one thing that truly matters, and that's connecting with another human being.

And this, uh, you know, uh, this moment in time, you know...

And it-- We could have all chosen a, a song, but we all chose "Wonderwall." We all chose "Wonderwall." And- Can an artist actually have control of that? I don't think entirely.

You...

It's, it's, uh, it's a bit of luck, but when I think about songs like, you know, like, like Ed Sheeran, um, "Perfect," the artist clearly had an energy in mind inside, and it translated out into the world, and people use that song for that purpose.

Mm.