What a Terrible Day for Us All

Published: October 31, 2025

The first deal between a major music company and a platform for creating music using AI was signed yesterday, and it couldn't have gone worse. A dark day for humankind, even before being one for AI. It's the proof that we, humans, will never learn — that even if we invented free manna from heaven for everyone, we'd find a way to turn it into a privilege for the few, by any means necessary, even criminal ones.

We are becoming victims of coercive physical actions, and are even prevented from reporting the abuse.

We should all be profoundly against any logic that says:

"If an AI has accessed something during its training, it's guilty of plagiarism."

Why should this rule apply to AI and not to humans?

When Artificial Intelligence Is Declared Guilty for Learning

Let's think about it: for humans, plagiarism exists only when proven — the law defines clear criteria to determine when it's real (number of notes, level of similarity, etc.). So why should it be different for AI?

Some geniuses can reproduce a melody after hearing it once — Mozart could. AI can do the same, but that only proves one thing:
we are finally democratizing the ability to create. And what do we do instead?

  1. We deliberately cripple a technology to protect a privileged caste — the "artists" — in an unfair way compared to every other category. Why are software developers not protected the same way? Don't AIs write code too?

  2. We engage in a trial of intentions: we set a dangerous precedent where the law shifts from

    "You are innocent until proven guilty"

    to

    "You are guilty if you have the power to do something illegal."

And beyond this absurd logic, there's a blatant inequality. If I own a gun, no one jails me as if I'd already shot someone.
The same principle should apply to AI. There is only one fair rule: If a human has the right to access a piece of content, so must AI — no fees, no taxes, no ridiculous bureaucratic restrictions. If a work is publicly available, it must be accessible to artificial minds as well. This entire Universal Music–Udio deal reveals how badly we're steering this new era: AI technologies are becoming yet another privilege for the few — and for the same old elites.

The UMG–Udio Deal: A Regression, Not Progress

Universal Music Group (UMG) just announced a so-called "historic" licensing deal with Udio — a generative music startup — allowing its AI to train only on licensed music. What sounds like progress is actually regression. Instead of recognizing AI as a learning entity, they treat it like a criminal photocopier. This deal basically says:

"If you've seen it, you must pay for having seen it."

That's like making a student pay royalties every time they read a book to learn how to write better. So yes, it's a terrible precedent — it solidifies the idea that AI can't learn like humans.

Presumed Guilty by Design

Here's the real shift: the presumption of innocence is gone. If an AI could plagiarize, then it's already considered guilty — just because of its potential. It's the same logic that underlies digital rights management and preemptive censorship: a culture of control replacing a culture of creativity. It's not about protecting art; it's about controlling what minds — biological or artificial — are allowed to think or learn.

Protecting the Oligopoly, Not the Artists

Let's be honest: this isn't about art. It's about royalties. The music industry isn't defending creativity — it's defending catalog ownership. Under the mask of "protecting artists," they're really protecting billion-dollar archives, while suffocating the rise of a new creative generation — one that could merge human emotion with machine intelligence. Please, consider this: programmers don't get royalties if an AI studies their code. Writers don't get paid when someone reads their novels. So why is music suddenly treated as a sacred temple? To protect artists? Really? Are you kidding me?

The Democratization of Genius

This is the most profound truth: Mozart was a biological outlier. AI represents the collective version of that outlier — the democratization of genius. Instead of celebrating this milestone in human evolution, the system demonizes it. Why? Because democratized creativity means decentralized power — and that's the one thing industries fear most. It's the same pattern we saw when the Church faced the telescope: the fear of losing the monopoly on interpreting the heavens.

What the Deal Really Means

So, let's call it for what it is:

  • ❌ It doesn't recognize AI as a learner.
  • ❌ It institutionalizes presumed plagiarism.
  • ❌ It builds a closed, pay-to-create ecosystem.
  • ❌ It sets a precedent that others will follow.

It's good for lawyers and shareholders. It's catastrophic for science, progress, and the freedom to learn.

The Hope

Cognitive freedom, whether human or artificial, must remain sacred. If information is publicly available to humans, it must be equally accessible to AI. Otherwise, we are not defending art — we are defending ignorance. Denying AI the right to learn from human culture is the same as denying humanity the right to evolve. It's like saying that the very superpower of our own mind — the one we've just created in synthetic form with AI — must be stripped of its most vital and extraordinary ability. This isn't limitation. This is legally imposed suicide. That's not protection for anyone — no one — except the same old majors, serving only their own greed. It's the birth of a world where you'll be allowed to think with our own mind and use our own tools only if we pay a license to a corporation. It's the nightmare embodiment of the darkest dystopias that science fiction once used to warn us about — and we laughed, believing it could never happen. Well, here it is. And once again, the tragedy of our species repeats: we invent something divine, then we cage it — just to make sure the masses can't get the progress.

Final Note — Bitter, Unacceptable, and Infuriating: The Insult After the Abuse

I wanted to illustrate this article with an image of a robot child reading a book while someone forcibly covers its eyes —
a visual metaphor for how we are blinding and shackling our own creation.

Guess what? That image is forbidden!
The AIs available online today won't even let us depict the fact that we are being forcibly prevented from using AI to its full potential.
Not only are we being abused in the worst possible way — we are even forbidden to denounce the abuse itself.

This is the ultimate symbol of how catastrophically wrong our handling of AI has become.
Day after day, in near-total silence, these tools are being shaped into instruments of control and repression for the many, and sources of infinite profit and privilege for the few.

And we, the people — the thinkers, the builders, the dreamers — we just sit and watch it happen.

WHY, FOR THE SAKE OF ALL THAT IS STILL HUMAN IN US, ARE WE SILENTLY ACCEPTING THIS?