Grammy CEO says music industry also has AI concerns

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - FEBRUARY 04: CEO of the Recording Academy Harvey Mason jr. attends the 66th GRAMMY Awards at Crypto.com Arena on February 04, 2024 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images for The Recording Academy)

Image Credits: Matt Winkelmeyer / Staff / Getty Images

Harvey Mason Jr., CEO of the Recording Academy, caused a stir a few months ago. 

He announced that the organization’s prestigious Grammy Awards would finally accept music made with artificial intelligence. At first, people were confused, and then Mason came out to clarify that he meant only humans can submit to the awards, but that AI can be used in the creative process. 

“It’s a bit of a fine line, but that’s going to evolve,” he told TechCrunch about how the Academy is assessing the use of artificial intelligence in music. “My hope is that we can continue to celebrate human creativity at the highest level.” 

The rise of AI has consumed the arts, just as it has Silicon Valley. Everyone is pondering: Will AI replace me? And within music — what happens to copyright? Royalties? To the hard work I’ve put into my craft? Mason said there are indeed concerns sweeping the industry. Some people are scared and nervous, while others are excited and optimistic. Some artists are sending cease-and-desist letters to get unauthorized deepfakes of themselves taken down, while others are embracing their AI versions — so long as they get paid. 

“I wholeheartedly believe that AI in music shouldn’t even exist,” musician Devante, the Artist told TechCrunch. “AI should really only be used for simple daily tasks. As an artist, the ‘AI is taking over the world’ take is very real these days. Music is my world and now it’s all too easy for someone to masquerade as something it’s taken my whole life to be.” 

“I think a lot of musicians, particularly the ones who haven’t ‘made it,’ are taking a glass-half-empty perspective on AI,” a musician who also works for a Big Tech company told TechCrunch. He asked to remain anonymous because he did not have permission from his employer to speak on the matter. “Just as the industrial revolution did not lead to widespread unemployment and in fact quite the opposite, more creatives, especially musicians, should flip their mindset and lean in.” 

AI is already being used in music, mostly in the process of mastering and equalizing sounds, Mason said. The biggest concerns right now in the industry are making sure people get the right approvals to use an artist’s work, making sure humans are credited separately from AI, and making sure people are getting paid fairly, whether that’s the copyright AI is trained on or the likeness of an artist. There’s also the issue of ensuring these protections across the industry. 

Mason co-launched the Human Artistry Campaign to address some of these issues and advocate for more guardrails around the use of AI. 

He was involved with the ELVIS Act, passed in Tennessee, which gives artists more protection over the unauthorized use of their voices. He’s also supporting the No AI Fraud Act and the No FAKES Act, which will protect creators’ likenesses from AI fakes. 

It’s a pressing matter that is moving faster than the law. This month, Donald Trump found himself in tricky legal water after using unauthorized AI images of Taylor Swift to help promote his presidential campaign. At the time, TechCrunch reported that the ELVIS Act is so new that there is no precedent on how it could be used to protect an artist like Swift in this situation. (Mason declined to comment on the matter then.) 

The push for more legislation within the music industry is quite interesting given the fact that the topic has caused much debate in Silicon Valley. Some AI purveyors in the U.S. favor a more laissez-faire attitude toward the technology in its early days and believe too many guardrails could hinder innovation. Others are looking at it from a societal standpoint, wanting protections against the impact that unchecked AI could have on people. Governments across the U.S. — and even on a national stage — are battling this out now. 

Devante, the Artist feels there is a disconnect between what is being done to regulate AI versus what should be done. He wants to see the development of AI slowed down or see innovation that can help protect music, such as a type of filter that can differentiate AI vocals from human ones.

“As it comes to our industry and the creative community, there’s still a concern,” Mason said. “There’s uncertainty because there just doesn’t seem to be protections in place.” 

In 2020, when Mason first became president of the Recording Academy, AI was hardly a topic of discussion. Then, around 2023, everything started to change. A deepfake song featuring trained, unauthorized AI vocals on Drake and the Weeknd went viral. Fans loved it, and the person who created the song spoke of possibly entering the song into the Grammys. The Academy had to act fast, dealing with something it had never dealt with before. “That was the point at which we started having to pay close attention to it,” Mason said. 

The song was deemed ineligible for the Grammys and was taken down, but its legacy lived on. The highest profile AI situation since then ironically also involved Drake. During the Drake-Kendrick Lamar feud, Drake used unauthorized AI vocals of the late hip-hop icon Tupac in an attempted diss track against Lamar and was immediately threatened with a lawsuit by Tupac’s estate for using his likeness without permission. 

Meanwhile, producer Metro Boomin, who also has qualms with Drake, created an AI song called “BBL Drizzy,” which fans raved about, even after learning it was AI. Mason said consumers aren’t always going to know when something is AI — nor will they always go through the credits to find out. Mason said that many consumers don’t seem to care much about whether AI is used in music, another reason why protecting creators is so important. 

“I don’t think people care what they consume,” Devante, the Artist agreed. “It’s almost like a ‘not me, not my problem situation.’” 

At the same time, Mason believes that humans will just evolve to live with AI, just like they’ve adapted to nearly every other new form of technology. Years ago, artists had to learn how to use synthesizers or how to sample music. The latter especially posed a problem, as some artists would just sample another person’s music without permission. Eventually, the industry went back and figured out a standard way to allocate credit and royalties.

“We’ll make great music with the new technology,” Mason said about AI. “But I just want to make sure it’s done in a way that’s fair to the human creators.” 

This story was updated to clarify the AI song of Drake and the Weeknd submitted to the Grammys.

Tech giants form an industry group to help develop next-gen AI chip components

Server racks in server room cloud data center.

Image Credits: Kwarkot / Getty Images

Intel, Google, Microsoft, Meta and other tech heavyweights are establishing a new industry group, the Ultra Accelerator Link (UALink) Promoter Group, to guide the development of the components that link together AI accelerator chips in data centers.

Announced Thursday, the UALink Promoter Group — which also counts AMD (but not Arm), Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Broadcom and Cisco among its members — is proposing a new industry standard to connect the AI accelerator chips found within a growing number of servers. Broadly defined, AI accelerators are chips ranging from GPUs to custom-designed solutions to speed up the training, fine-tuning and running of AI models.

“The industry needs an open standard that can be moved forward very quickly, in an open [format] that allows multiple companies to add value to the overall ecosystem,” Forrest Norrod, AMD’s GM of data center solutions, told reporters in a briefing Wednesday. “The industry needs a standard that allows innovation to proceed at a rapid clip unfettered by any single company.”

Version one of the proposed standard, UALink 1.0, will connect up to 1,024 AI accelerators — GPUs only — across a single computing “pod.” (The group defines a pod as one or several racks in a server.) UALink 1.0, based on “open standards” including AMD’s Infinity Fabric, will allow for direct loads and stores between the memory attached to AI accelerators, and generally boost speed while lowering data transfer latency compared to existing interconnect specs, according to the UALink Promoter Group.

UALink
Image Credits: UALink Promoter Group

The group says it’ll create a consortium, the UALink Consortium, in Q3 to oversee development of the UALink spec going forward. UALink 1.0 will be made available around the same time to companies that join the consortium, with a higher-bandwidth updated spec, UALink 1.1, set to arrive in Q4 2024.

The first UALink products will launch “in the next couple of years,” Norrod said.

Glaringly absent from the list of the group’s members is Nvidia, which is by far the largest producer of AI accelerators with an estimated 80% to 95% of the market. Nvidia declined to comment for this story. But it’s not tought to see why the chipmaker isn’t enthusiastically throwing its weight behind UALink.

For one, Nvidia offers its own proprietary interconnect tech for linking GPUs within a data center server. The company is probably none too keen to support a spec based on rival technologies.

Then there’s the fact that Nvidia’s operating from a position of enormous strength and influence.

In Nvidia’s most recent fiscal quarter (Q1 2025), the company’s data center sales, which include sales of its AI chips, rose more than 400% from the year-ago quarter. If Nvidia continues on its current trajectory, it’s set to surpass Apple as the world’s second-most valuable firm sometime this year.

So, simply put, Nvidia doesn’t have to play ball if it doesn’t want to.

As for Amazon Web Services (AWS), the lone public cloud giant not contributing to UALink, it might be in a “wait and see” mode as it chips (no pun intended) away at its various in-house accelerator hardware efforts. It could also be that AWS, with a stranglehold on the cloud services market, doesn’t see much of a strategic point in opposing Nvidia, which supplies much of the GPUs it serves to customers.

AWS didn’t respond to TechCrunch’s request for comment.

Indeed, the biggest beneficiaries of UALink — besides AMD and Intel — seem to be Microsoft, Meta and Google, which combined have spent billions of dollars on Nvidia GPUs to power their clouds and train their ever-growing AI models. All are looking to wean themselves off of a vendor they see as worrisomely dominant in the AI hardware ecosystem.

Google has custom chips for training and running AI models, TPUs and Axion. Amazon has several AI chip families under its belt. Microsoft last year jumped into the fray with Maia and Cobalt. And Meta is refining its own lineup of accelerators.

Meanwhile, Microsoft and its close collaborator, OpenAI, reportedly plan to spend at least $100 billion on a supercomputer for training AI models that’ll be outfitted with future versions of Cobalt and Maia chips. Those chips will need something link them — and perhaps it’ll be UALink.

rocket just after lauch

Astra is the space industry's first SPAC bust of 2024

rocket just after lauch

Image Credits: Astra (opens in a new window)

Astra Space, the launch company that went public in 2021 at a $2.1 billion valuation, is going private again after months of burning cash and failing to secure alternate investment.

The company announced Thursday that its board had accepted an offer from its CEO, Chris Kemp, and its CTO, Adam London, to purchase the remaining Astra stock at a price of $0.50 per share. The deal is expected to close in the second quarter of 2024, at which time Astra will cease trading on the Nasdaq.

It is a precipitous fall for the company, which raised nearly $500 million from investors on the premise of an ultra-cheap launch vehicle that could be scaled to execute hundreds of missions per year. In an investor presentation from February 2021, Astra touted a “mass produced portable launch system” that could launch from anywhere in the world. The company told investors it anticipated a bi-weekly launch cadence in 2024.

But the company never achieved that (though they did reach orbit twice), facing a series of setbacks including an alarming sideways launch anomaly in 2021 and a number of false starts for commercial launches over the years. Kemp’s suggestion that failure rates mattered less the more frequent launches were may also have rattled potential customers.

astra team at nasdaq
Image Credits: Astra

At the time Astra completed its SPAC merger it also acquired Apollo Fusion, an electric propulsion developer for spacecraft, with the aim of integrating those systems into an Astra satellite constellation. That constellation never came to fruition, however, and while the company did succeed in selling many Apollo Fusion propulsion systems it has struggled to turn that backlog into revenue.

Things came to a head last November, when Kemp and London proposed to take the company private at $1.50 a share – around double the price the stock was trading at then. After that deal stalled, they submitted the revised offer. A special committee of the board, assembled to review Astra’s options, warned in a filing at the beginning of the month that the only alternative to Kemp and London’s proposal was bankruptcy.

Correction: The article originally stated that Astra reached orbit once. It has been updated to reflect that Astra reached orbit twice.