What’s Your New Year's Resolution?

Introduction

In June 2026, Eros Innovation launched Eros Music Worlds, describing itself as the world's first "large cultural music platform". Its first two acts, Jordan and Tanu, are not singers in any conventional sense; they are AI-native personas built from Eros's own film characters, powered by models trained on a licensed corpus of roughly 1.5 trillion cultural tokens drawn from 11,000 films. Alongside them sits a strategic partnership with the family of Mohammed Rafi, the late playback legend, to produce new recordings, a live concert franchise, and a music academy in his name. It's a tidy preview of where AI in music is actually headed: not a novelty generator bolted onto the old industry, but a new kind of media company built around owned IP, licensed data, and characters designed to outlive any single song.

Beyond the demo

The last eighteen months have produced a stream of "firsts". Xania Monet, an AI-voiced R&B act built by Mississippi poet Telisha Jones using Suno, became the first AI artist to chart on a Billboard airplay ranking and was signed by Hallwood Media after a bidding war that reportedly reached $3 million. Breaking Rust, Enlly Blue and Juno Skye followed onto country, rock and Christian charts within weeks. None of this happened in a vacuum: Suno and Udio, the two dominant AI music generators, went from being sued by every major label in mid-2024 to signing licensing settlements with Universal and Warner by late 2025. Voice cloning has run a parallel track from the viral 2023 track "Heart on My Sleeve", which mimicked Drake and The Weeknd without consent, to a wave of Indian cases where AI tools recreated a specific singer's timbre for commercial use. Composition and production tools are now routine studio infrastructure rather than curiosities; the interesting frontier has shifted to multilingual adaptation and catalogue reanimation. Eros has promised 34-language localisation for its AI artists, a scale no dubbing studio could match manually. A related, if less music-specific, signal came from Collective Artists Network's AI-powered Mahabharat: Ek Dharmayudh, produced with Prasar Bharati. AI tools handled pre-visualisation, multi-language dubbing sync and sound design, while composers and voice directors retained control of tone and emotion, a template other Indian studios are likely to copy for scoring and localising large-scale cultural content cheaply.

Where the money actually is?

The commercial case for labels isn't "AI makes music at scale", because scale alone isn't value. Deezer, the only major platform publishing detection data, reported in July 2026 that AI-generated tracks had crossed 50% of daily uploads, around 90,000 tracks a day, up from 10,000 in January 2025. Yet those tracks account for only 1–3% of actual streams, and Deezer flags 85% of that listening as fraudulent bot activity. Generating music has become nearly free; getting anyone to listen hasn't. The real opportunity for rights holders lies elsewhere: licensing catalogues into controlled ecosystems (Universal's 2026 platform with Udio, Warner's deals with both Udio and Suno), reviving legacy artists for new audiences (Eros-Rafi), and using AI for the unglamorous, high-volume work of localisation, sync placement and short-form content that never justified full production budgets before. AI-native performers also travel well into gaming, virtual concerts and brand collaboration formats built for characters rather than people, where a synthetic act never ages, never cancels a tour and can be licensed into a dozen campaigns simultaneously. That is a genuinely new revenue line, but it's a narrow one; it monetises IP ownership, not music generation itself. IFPI's Global Music Report 2026 shows the underlying business is healthy: revenues reached $31.7 billion, up 6.4% — but that growth is still driven overwhelmingly by human catalogues and paid subscriptions, not AI-generated volumes.

The legal fault lines

This is where India's position is genuinely instructive and unresolved. The Copyright Act, 1957, defines the author of a "computer-generated" work as the person who causes it to be created (language added in 1994 for a world of human-directed software, not autonomous generative models), and Indian courts haven't yet settled how far it stretches. What's clearer is the industry's stance on training data: The Indian music industry body, alongside T-Series, Saregama and Sony Music, has sought to join the ANI Media suit against OpenAI in the Delhi High Court, arguing that scraping sound recordings to train models without a licence breaches copyright, a case they say is "crucial for the entire music industry in India, and even worldwide".

Personality rights have moved faster than legislation. In the absence of a dedicated statute, Indian courts have built protection case by case: the Delhi High Court's 2023 order shielding Anil Kapoor's voice and likeness from AI misuse and the Bombay High Court's 2024 ruling in Arijit Singh v Codible Ventures, India's first AI voice-cloning judgement, which granted an injunction spanning every medium, explicitly including the metaverse and generative-AI tools, and rejected fair-use and parody defences outright. Similar orders have since followed for Amitabh Bachchan, Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and others. The pattern mirrors, but predates, statutory responses abroad: Tennessee's 2024 ELVIS Act was the first US law to protect voice explicitly as property, and the federal NO FAKES Act remains pending. The US Copyright Office's January 2025 report reaffirmed that human authorship is the bedrock of copyrightability, denying protection to fully AI-generated output while leaving substantially human-directed hybrid works to case-by-case review. Two regimes are converging on the same instinct that consent and human contribution must anchor ownership through different legal tools: India via judge-made personality rights and the US via statute and Copyright Office guidance.

Who bears the risk?

The disruption isn't evenly spread. Session singers, jingle artists, dubbing performers and early-career composers, the layer of the industry that supplies craft rather than fame, are most exposed since their work is precisely what generative tools now approximate cheaply. A PRS for Music survey of over 2,600 creators found 79% worried about AI competing directly with their output and 76% expecting it to hurt their livelihoods. CISAC has projected AI could erode musicians' incomes by nearly a quarter by 2028. Separately, roughly a fifth of professional voice actors surveyed say they've already lost work to a synthetic voice. For streaming platforms, the risk is structural: as AI supply floods catalogues, royalty pools shared across all streams get diluted, discoverability worsens, and fraud bot streams on AI tracks are designed purely to harvest royalties, which becomes a live threat to the economics everyone else depends on.

Recommendations

None of this points to AI simply replacing musicians, nor to it staying a background production tool. A third category is emerging AI-native "characters" with continuity, backstory and owned IP, closer to franchise properties than bands, which is exactly the model Eros and Hallwood Media are betting on. The deeper shift underneath it is economic: once the marginal cost of producing a new track approaches zero, the constraint on the industry stops being supplied and becomes attention. Whether AI-native artists become a durable category depends on questions still unresolved, training data legality chief among them, and on whether audiences keep listening once the novelty fades. Deezer's own research found 97% of listeners can't reliably distinguish AI from human music, yet 52% still believe fully AI-generated songs shouldn't sit on the same charts as human ones. Provenance matters even when perception can't detect it.

Conclusion

Scarcity in the age of AI will not be creative output but genuine human connection. As AI makes music production abundant and inexpensive, the qualities it cannot replicate authenticity, lived experience, artistic identity, and trust – become increasingly valuable. Audiences will continue to seek creators with compelling stories and meaningful live experiences. In an era of infinite synthetic content, originality is no longer the premium; credibility, human presence, and emotional connection are.

Sources

1. https://www.livemint.com/industry/media/ai-music-ai-native-artists-eros-music-worlds-eros-innovation-copyright-intellectual-property-music-industry-11785053693997.html
2. https://www.facebook.com/KJSIMofficial/posts/the-mint-featured-insights-from-dr-alka-agarwal-assistant-professor-general-mana/1375301184595168/
3. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/livemint_how-ai-brought-the-mahabharat-to-life-collective-activity-7389643662193999873-6BKG
4. https://musically.com/2026/07/02/ai-powered-platform-eros-music-worlds-is-turning-film-characters-into-virtual-singers/
5. https://www.business-standard.com/companies/news/bollywood-t-series-saregama-sony-music-copyright-lawsuit-openai-delhi-hc-125021400876_1.html 

‍

Introduction
‍

In April 2026, Anthropic revealed Claude Mythos, an artificial intelligence application capable of finding security flaws in computer networks more effectively than human beings. The corporation claimed to have found hundreds of thousands of substantially serious vulnerabilities in established desktop operating systems and web-based browsers that have not been used for at least 20 years. This news has greatly alarmed those responsible for leading financial organisations, banks, and governments throughout the world. Nevertheless, this news demonstrates a much larger problem: we do not have enough cybersecurity professionals trained to do this kind of work. At the current estimate, there are 4.8 million cyber security professionals short of what is needed globally. There is a need to develop different kinds of workforce training programs to help prepare these professionals as we continue to see the emergence of new AI technologies.

‍

What Is Claude Mythos ?
‍

Anthropic created Claude Mythos as part of its Claude AI system, competing against ChatGPT and Google Gemini. In April 2026, expert testing revealed Mythos excelled at identifying problems in legacy code and suggested exploitation methods. It found a vulnerability that had existed for 27 years. Because of these advanced capabilities, Anthropic restricted access through “Project Glasswing,” giving it only to 12 major tech companies and 40 organizations managing critical software. Canadian Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne called it an “unknown unknown.” Andrew Bailey of the Bank of England said regulators needed to examine what Mythos could mean for financial attacks. The European Union raised concerns. India’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman warned at SEBI’s Foundation Day on April 25, 2026, that cybersecurity is the single most pressing challenge facing markets today. She stated a single successful cyberattack on a major exchange or large broker could disrupt markets nationally and shake public confidence for years. Sitharaman emphasized that AI tools make attacks faster, more adaptive, and autonomous, capable of discovering system vulnerabilities and manipulating code.

‍

The Real Problem: Discovery Versus Fixing
‍

Mythos highlights a fundamental mismatch in cybersecurity. Finding a vulnerability does not guarantee it will be fixed. Organizations face challenges patching systems. Many use obsolete technology, and updates can break dependent components. Organizations in developing nations often lack financial resources for repairs or downtime. Critical systems like hospitals, banks, and power grids cannot go offline. Before Mythos, human hackers found vulnerabilities slowly. Now AI tools find weaknesses faster than they can be fixed, creating a dangerous gap. Ciaran Martin, former head of the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre, explained that Mythos is “a really good hacker” against unprotected systems. Organizations following basic security practices—regular updates, strong passwords, network protection, trained staff can likely defend against it. The UK AI Safety Institute concluded Mythos poses the biggest threat to poorly defended systems, noting: “We cannot say for sure whether Mythos Preview would be able to attack well-defended systems.”

‍

The Workforce Challenge
‍

The Mythos announcement exposes the real problem: we lack enough trained cybersecurity workers. There is a global shortage of 4.8 million workers against a current workforce of 5.5 million. In AI security specifically, 34 percent of needed skills are missing. But the harder problem is that AI is changing needed skills. Entry-level jobs monitoring security alerts are being automated. These were traditional career starting points. Young people learned basic skills and moved to advanced roles. Now these positions disappear while new AI security jobs emerge for which nobody has training. Organizations cannot hire fast enough for new AI roles because few people have these skills. This leads to a vicious cycle. With fewer entry-level positions available, there will be fewer young adults entering the job market which results in even fewer workers with this skill set; thus, the shortage of qualified applicants increases; this thereby increases organizations’ vulnerability. Without action taken immediately, this issue will continue to worsen 

‍

Way Forward
‍

1. Clarify What Skills We Need

Governments and industry must work together to define what cybersecurity workers need in an AI world. Currently, aspiring professionals study networking, software, and vulnerability finding, but AI security training barely exists. Governments should work with universities and companies to clarify needed skills: understanding what AI tools can and cannot do in security, finding and fixing AI system problems.

2. Support Workers Who Lose Jobs To Automation

Workers who find themselves losing their jobs due to automation will require government support. All too often without an alternative, these skilled and trained workers will leave their profession forever. The government will need to provide funding for training of displaced employees, support for those changing careers to become cyber security professionals.

3. Create Clear Rules For AI Security Tools

When companies create powerful security tools, governments must understand their capabilities and risks. Companies should be required to thoroughly test tools before release, clearly explain what tools can do and their limitations, and explain safety and misuse prevention plans. Governments should monitor actual tool usage, not simply trust voluntary compliance.

4. Focus On Basic Security First

Most attacks do not need advanced AI tools. They succeed because organizations have not implemented basic security. Some never update software, train employees, use strong passwords, protect data properly, or test defenses. Governments should require organizations, especially those managing critical systems, to implement these basics.

‍

Conclusion
‍

Claude Mythos matters not because it is a weapon of destruction, but because it forces hard questions: Do we have enough skilled workers? Are our systems well-protected? The answer is no. We face a shortage of 4.8 million cybersecurity workers and lack AI security training. Yet this is also an opportunity. Governments can invest in training, strengthen defenses, and create clear rules for AI security tools. Governments, organizations and educational institutions must collaborate to create viable Cybersecurity career pathways. We can act through either creating panic or creating a trained and prepared workforce to meet today’s challenges. The time is now.

‍

References 
‍

1. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crk1py1jgzko
2. https://red.anthropic.com/2026/mythos-preview/ 
3. https://www.anthropic.com/project/glasswing 
4. https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/our-evaluation-of-claude-mythos-previews-cyber-capabilities 
5. https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/people/ciaran-martin 
6. https://www.isc2.org/Insights/2024/10/Cybersecurity-Workforce-INSIGHTS-October-2024 
7. https://decrypt.co/364141/anthropic-claude-mythos-serious-threat-overhyped-ai-security-institute 
8. https://www.businesstoday.in/latest/economy/story/fm-nirmala-sitharaman-wants-sebi-regulated-entities-to-remain-exceptionally-vigilant-heres-why-527437-2026-04-25 
9. https://www.theweek.in/news/biz-tech/2026/04/25/sebi-38th-anniversary-cybersecurity-concerns.html 

‍

Introduction

Emerging technologies in the digital era have made their inroads in manifold domains and locations, including the “Aviation industry”. A 2022 Cranfield University and Inmarsat report has made the point for digitalization powering a reviving age for the aviation industry. Several airport authorities are presently mobilizing power of emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) across the airport bedrock to provide travelers with a plain sailing and expeditious air travel experience.

The Perils of Juice-Jacking

Today, Universal Serial Bus (USB) charging ports are ubiquitous and a convenient way for travelers to keep their devices powered up. In their busy, mundane lives, people use the public charging facility while travelling. However, cybersecurity experts have warned that charging in public areas could wipe off data from an electronic device or install malware, and they have urged people to stay away from USB charging ports at airports and other public areas. This leads to the possibility that fraudsters may manipulate susceptible users via juice jacking.

Investigative journalist Brian Krebs in 2011 coined the term "Juice Jacking". It isa form of cyber attack where a public USB charging port is fiddled with and infected using hardware and software changes to pocket data or install malware on devices connected to it. The term “juice jacking” is a slang representation for electric power or energy, and “hijacking” indicates an unauthorized key toa device.

While the preliminary purpose of juice jacking is usually to pilfer sensitive information from corresponding devices, such as passwords and payment card details, attackers can exploit this stolen information to attain unauthorized to your financial accounts. If the adversary attacker installs malware in the electronic device during the juice jacking strategy, the attacker may further observe the individual's movements even after one has disconnected the device from the USB port. However, the hazards of Juice Jacking include malware infection, data heist, economic loss and damage to the reputation of an individual.

RedFlags from Agencies

In2023, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) forewarned travelers against using charging stations in public zones such as hotels, airports, and shopping malls due to malicious actors attempting to use the public USB to introduce monitoring software and malware into devices. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has also administered a new advisory regarding “juice jacking "and its possibility of launching a hushed cyber attack against a mobile gadget while one is charging the phone with a USB cord. Similarly, according to new research from International Business Machines (IBM) Security, many nation-state hackers are currently training their eyes on travelers.

RBI Advisory

Recently in 2024, The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has likewise administered a warning statement to mobile phone users urging them against charging their devices using public ports. RBI has additionally accentuated the importance of safeguarding private and financial data while using mobile devices. Juice jacking is further cited as one of the scams in the RBI booklet on the modus operandi of financial fraudsters in the financial space.

Preventing juice jacking attacks

The routes to avoid Juice Jacking are to keep a tab on the USB devices, not use the public charging ports, update the phone software regularly, enable and utilize the software security measures of the device, use a USB pass-through device, a wall outlet, or a backup battery; never use unknown charging cables and use only the trusted security apps. It is further important to avoid using cables that are left behind by other travelers in any public space. Users can correspondingly turn off their devices before connecting to a wary charging port. Nevertheless, the absence of documented cases does not necessarily imply that users cannot be a target of such an attack and a warning is still recommended when securing personal gadgets with susceptible user data while using standard cables. Also, using a virtual private network (VPN) and assuring that devices have the updated security updates established can aid in mitigating the danger of cyber attacks. It is equally important to utilize the security features of your device, such as passcodes, fingerprints, or facial recognition, enabled to count as a supplementary layer of safeguard.

Conclusion

In the contemporary digital age, individuals, on the whole, need to be vigilant about “Cybersecurity hygiene” and avoid accessing susceptible data or conducting financial transactions on unsecured networks. Mobile phones or devices should run on the latest operating system, and antivirus software should be revamped to mitigate conceivable security susceptibilities.

References

• https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2023/04/20/juice-jacking-malware-phone-airports-hotels/?sh=47adab7e82ed
• https://www.businessairportinternational.com/features/how-ai-is-improving-business-aviation-operations.html
• https://www.news18.com/business/juice-jacking-attack-scam-bank-frauds-india-8412037.html
• https://www.comparitech.com/blog/information-security/juice-jacking/
• https://blogs.blackberry.com/en/2023/04/juice-jacking-advisory
• https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/juice-jacking-rbi-issues-warning-against-charging-mobile-phones-using-public-ports/article67895091.ece
• https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/juice-jacking-how-hackers-target-smartphones-tethered-to-public-charging-points/article67026433.ece
• https://www.forbes.com/sites/suzannerowankelleher/2019/05/21/why-you-should-never-use-airport-usb-charging-stations/?sh=630f026a5955
• https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/12/tech/fbi-public-charging-port-warning/index.html
• https://social-innovation.hitachi/en-in/knowledge-hub/hitachi-voice/digital-transformation/
• https://www.inmarsat.com/en/insights/aviation/2022/future-aviation-connectivity.html