Namibia: Embracing AI in Music Raises IP, Governance Questions

Namibia should not fear artificial intelligence in music. We should learn to use it responsibly and allow our artists and young creators to innovate. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly becoming an important part of the global music industry. Yet in Namibia it remains a sensitive subject. Some artists and fans have openly condemned AI music, while others appear afraid to discuss it because they fear that once people discover AI Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn might have been used in their production, their music will no longer be supported. I believe Namibia needs to move beyond fear and begin having an open and mature conversation about the possibilities of AI in music. I have been involved in music production since 2009, when I acquired my studio equipment and started producing with FL Studio. During this time, I have witnessed technology continuously help transform music production. A personal experience that changed my thinking was my attitude towards auto-tune. I was once strongly against it and deliberately avoided using it because I believed it was not good for music production. Eventually I realised that I was limiting my own creativity. By refusing to explore technology, I was also limiting the sounds and production techniques available to me. That experience taught me that technology itself is not necessarily the problem; how we use it is what matters. I therefore see AI as another creative tool. It can help a young person who has a musical idea but lacks expensive equipment, musicians or access to a professional studio. It can assist songwriters with ideas, help producers explore arrangements and allow artists to experiment with different sounds and styles. The human creator still provides the concept, message, direction and final creative decisions. An interesting local example is DJ Lics from Katima Mulilo, who uses AI to help create music while developing his own lyrical ideas. His music has attracted attention and has given people something to listen to, to discuss and to dance to. From my own observation, some of his songs address subjects such as love, family and everyday life. For me, this demonstrates why we should not automatically dismiss a song simply because AI was involved in its creation. If people enjoy the music, connect with the message and find value in the song, the technology used to create it should not automatically erase that experience. Rhythm and responsability This raises an important question: Why do people's attitude sometimes change when they discover that AI was used? A listener may enjoy a song, dance to it and share it, but once they discover that AI was involved, they may suddenly reject it. The song itself has not necessarily changed; only the listener's perception of the production process has changed. This is why I believe we need to judge AI-assisted music based on its creative outcome while also considering how responsibly the technology was used. I am particularly concerned that some Namibian musicians may be afraid to openly acknowledge their use of AI because they fear being judged or rejected. That fear can prevent meaningful discussion and learning. AI is not going away so avoiding the conversation will not stop its development. Instead, Namibia should encourage artists, producers, young people, broadcasters and other stakeholders to discuss how AI can be used responsibly. There are legitimate concerns surrounding copyright, consent, voice cloning and impersonation, and these issues must be taken seriously. Supporting AI does not mean supporting unethical use of the technology. We can embrace innovation while protecting artists and their creative rights. For young Namibians, AI could provide new opportunities to experiment with music and enter the creative industry with fewer barriers. We should teach young creators how to use these technologies rather than simply telling them to avoid them. At the same time, AI does not have to destroy our