This appendix gives the sixteen inquiries the paper read, in the order of the case list, word for word in the English translation made once for this study from Dionyas's Korean. None carries a judgment; Dionyas publishes them as editorial question designs, and what a record says about a named company, platform or recording is its framing, not a fact checked here. A line the studio copies into every inquiry of the domain or of its industry series is given in full once, and named where it recurs.
Assistance or replacement
Dionyas inquiry inquiry:ai:01 is a general review design that names no artist, work or market, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=inquiry%3Aai%3A01.
A record of the work that divides assistance from replacement
When AI is used for each of lyric ideas, arrangement suggestions, correction and full generation, in what stages of the work should the person's choices and the tool's output be recorded?
AI and creative control · a general review design. The artist, work, market and period it applies to are named when it is recorded.
Records of work versions, tools used, terms, consent and human contribution
The subject under review, the period, the terms of comparison and counter-examples
Tells AI assistance from full generation, and permission to use from the existence of a right.
Question designed · awaiting inquiry
The refused suggestion
Dionyas inquiry inquiry:ai:02 is a general review design that names no artist, work or market, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=inquiry%3Aai%3A02; its two needs and its boundary are the domain's lines, word for word as given under Assistance or replacement.
Why an AI's suggestion was refused
If the grounds on which a person chose, revised or discarded among several generated candidates are kept, how can the judgments of the creative process, and not only the finished work, be explained?
AI and creative control · a general review design. The artist, work, market and period it applies to are named when it is recorded.
Question designed · awaiting inquiry
Copyright-free
Dionyas inquiry inquiry:ai:03 is a general review design that names no artist, work or market, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=inquiry%3Aai%3A03; its two needs and its boundary are the domain's lines, word for word as given under Assistance or replacement.
The conditions behind the phrase ‘copyright-free’
If a tool's claim that its output may be used commercially does not mean the output is free of rights disputes in every country, what checks of terms, inputs and rights are needed besides?
AI and creative control · a general review design. The artist, work, market and period it applies to are named when it is recorded.
Question designed · awaiting inquiry
Imitation or one's own
Dionyas inquiry inquiry:ai:04 is a general review design that names no artist, work or market, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=inquiry%3Aai%3A04; its two needs and its boundary are the domain's lines, word for word as given under Assistance or replacement.
Close imitation and expression of one's own
When an AI demo strongly recalls the style of an existing artist, how is the producer to tell mere familiarity from the expression their own work needs?
AI and creative control · a general review design. The artist, work, market and period it applies to are named when it is recorded.
Question designed · awaiting inquiry
Material not for release
Dionyas inquiry inquiry:ai:05 is a general review design that names no artist, work or market, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=inquiry%3Aai%3A05; its two needs and its boundary are the domain's lines, word for word as given under Assistance or replacement.
Before putting in material that cannot be made public
When unreleased sessions, contract documents or another person's voice are about to be put into an AI tool, have the policies on retention, training and reuse, and the scope of the parties' consent, been checked?
AI and creative control · a general review design. The artist, work, market and period it applies to are named when it is recorded.
Question designed · awaiting inquiry
The corrected voice
Dionyas inquiry inquiry:ai:06 is a general review design that names no artist, work or market, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=inquiry%3Aai%3A06; its two needs and its boundary are the domain's lines, word for word as given under Assistance or replacement.
The voice that AI correction erased
If the vocal's character has weakened after correction of pronunciation, pitch and timing, with what loudness-matched comparison should technical accuracy and the singularity of the expression be read?
AI and creative control · a general review design. The artist, work, market and period it applies to are named when it is recorded.
Question designed · awaiting inquiry
Two costs
Dionyas inquiry inquiry:ai:07 is a general review design that names no artist, work or market, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=inquiry%3Aai%3A07; its two needs and its boundary are the domain's lines, word for word as given under Assistance or replacement.
The cost of generating and the cost of reviewing
If AI makes drafts quickly but the time spent selecting, checking rights and reworking grows, what costs are actually reduced across the whole production, and what new burdens arise?
AI and creative control · a general review design. The artist, work, market and period it applies to are named when it is recorded.
Question designed · awaiting inquiry
Explaining AI's part
Dionyas inquiry inquiry:ai:08 is a general review design that names no artist, work or market, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=inquiry%3Aai%3A08; its two needs and its boundary are the domain's lines, word for word as given under Assistance or replacement.
How should AI's part be explained?
When the extent of AI use in a work is disclosed, is what the audience wants to know the name of the tool, or the human contribution, the consent to the voice and the intention of the work?
AI and creative control · a general review design. The artist, work, market and period it applies to are named when it is recorded.
Question designed · awaiting inquiry
The label agreement
Dionyas inquiry case:wmg-suno-consent is an editorial case about a named organisation or work, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=case%3Awmg-suno-consent.
The WMG and Suno agreement: where does the artist's consent remain?
How far is the artist's choice promised in the WMG–Suno announcement of 25 November 2025 made concrete, in the actual guidance for taking part, as the scope of consent for voice, name and works, withdrawal, credits and the way of settling payment?
Warner Music Group × Suno · the announcement of 2025.11.25 set against the public documents that followed · reviewed as of 2026.09.13
The latest official participation and product documents, and the version of the terms
Accounts of use and settlement given in public cases or with the consent of the parties
The announcement alone does not guarantee that permission is complete, that use is free of copyright, or legal safety. It does not replace the actual contracts or legal review in each jurisdiction.
Sources under review · interpretation and hypothesis kept apart
Uploads and streams
Dionyas inquiry case:deezer-ai-supply-demand is an editorial case about a named organisation or work, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=case%3Adeezer-ai-supply-demand.
Deezer's AI uploads at 44%: why was listening 1–3%?
Is the gap between the 44% share of new uploads and the 1–3% share of streams for fully AI-generated tracks, as Deezer announced on 20 April 2026, to be explained by a lack of demand or by the policy of leaving them out of recommendations?
Deezer · as of the announcement of 2026.04.20 · telling apart the supply of AI tracks, listening and recommendation policy
Permitted aggregates for the same period, by track age and by route of arrival
An account of the methods of AI labelling, exclusion from recommendations and handling of fraudulent plays
This matter stands as of the April 2026 announcement and its figures are not the latest. It does not widen the class of fully AI-generated tracks to all AI-assisted production, and it does not treat the company's detection as independently verified truth or as the state of every service.
Sources under review · interpretation and hypothesis kept apart
Terms and authorship
Dionyas inquiry case:industry-human-authorship-terms is a designed case of the studio's industry series, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=case%3Aindustry-human-authorship-terms.
AI assistance and human authorship, permission for commercial use and exclusive rights
Even if an AI tool's terms at the time permit commercial use, what separate review do third-party rights, exclusivity and human authorship call for? Can a paid plan be described as granting full rights?
Official guidance by jurisdiction and tool terms · the history of each work must be reviewed · inquiry design · awaiting judgment
Records of work versions, tools used, terms, consent and human contribution
Sources and access rights fitting the stated subject, period and country; items not provided stay missing
Tells AI assistance from full generation, and permission to use from the existence of a right. The number of questions is not the amount of data obtained or the number of judgments. Only permitted public material and aggregates with consent and authority are used.
Question registered · awaiting judgment
One permission
Dionyas inquiry case:industry-voice-consent-scope is a designed case of the studio's industry series, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=case%3Aindustry-voice-consent-scope; its two needs are the series' lines, word for word as given under Terms and authorship.
AI voices and consent: how far a single permission reaches
How should the scope of a voice model a singer has permitted (songs, languages, advertising, period, retraining) be confirmed item by item? May consent to a sample recording be extended to consent to making a model?
The explicit consent and contractual scope of an adult party · a hypothetical production design · inquiry design · awaiting judgment
Tells AI assistance from full generation, and permission to use from the existence of a right. The number of questions is not the amount of data obtained or the number of judgments. Only permitted public material and aggregates with consent and authority are used.
Question registered · awaiting judgment
Chosen lines
Dionyas inquiry case:industry-lyrics-composition-ai-candidates is a designed case of the studio's industry series, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=case%3Aindustry-lyrics-composition-ai-candidates; its two needs are the series' lines, word for word as given under Terms and authorship.
Records of collaboration on lyrics and composition: the expression a person chose from a tool's candidates
If a person revised the lines and melodies an AI offered as candidates, in what record should the extent of what was used, discarded and rewritten be kept? Can the mere fact of having made the final edit be taken to mean that all rights are secured?
A collaboration agreed to · from demo to final version · inquiry design · awaiting judgment
Tells AI assistance from full generation, and permission to use from the existence of a right. The number of questions is not the amount of data obtained or the number of judgments. Only permitted public material and aggregates with consent and authority are used.
Question registered · awaiting judgment
Outsourced delivery
Dionyas inquiry case:industry-outsourcing-ai-disclosure is a designed case of the studio's industry series, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=case%3Aindustry-outsourcing-ai-disclosure; its two needs are the series' lines, word for word as given under Terms and authorship.
Handing over outsourced production: checking the use of AI inside what is delivered
With what delivery checklist should the extent of the AI tools, material and voices a contractor used be checked? Can a reply that there is no record of use be kept from being marked as independently verified?
Outsourced vocal recording, mixing and video · an approved contract design · inquiry design · awaiting judgment
Tells AI assistance from full generation, and permission to use from the existence of a right. The number of questions is not the amount of data obtained or the number of judgments. Only permitted public material and aggregates with consent and authority are used.
Question registered · awaiting judgment
Now And Then
Dionyas inquiry case:beatles-nowthen-restoration-credit is an editorial case about a named organisation or work, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=case%3Abeatles-nowthen-restoration-credit.
The Beatles' last song, the line between restoration and new creation
In The Beatles' ‘Now And Then’, released on 2 November 2023, in what order were the original John Lennon recording, the source-separation technology and the later playing and arrangement combined? How far can the official credits tell ‘separating an existing voice’ from ‘generating a new voice’?
The Beatles · Now And Then · 1970s demo → 1995 work → released 2023.11.02
The official making-of documentary, the credits and the published version history
Where a judgment on rights is needed, the actual contracts and scope of consent of the parties
Source separation and voice generation are not the same work. The release in this case neither permits the use of any other deceased person's voice nor provides a legal conclusion.
Question registered · awaiting judgment
Bandcamp's standard
Dionyas inquiry case:bandcamp-ai-policy-boundary is an editorial case about a named organisation or work, with no judgment, at https://dionyas.risconlabs.com/research?inquiry=case%3Abandcamp-ai-policy-boundary.
Bandcamp's standard of human creation, between assistance and generation
How does Bandcamp's generative AI policy of 13 January 2026 treat music generated wholly or in substantial part by AI? When a source-separation case such as the Beatles' ‘Now And Then’ is taken as the point of comparison, can whether an upload is allowed be judged without the production history and the platform's confirmation?
Bandcamp · Keeping Bandcamp Human (2026.01.13) · telling generation, restoration and assistance work apart
The official policy in force at the time, and where needed the platform's answer
The work versions, tools and consent records over which one has authority
That an upload can be accepted does not guarantee that copyright subsists or that the work is copyright-free. This matter is neither permission to upload any particular work nor legal advice.
Question registered · awaiting judgment