Experiments in Musical Intelligence is a software developed in the 1980s by David Cope, designed to generate stylistically accurate imitations of composers' works by analyzing their existing music as input. The software was never released in its full form to the public and most of its databases were deleted by Cope himself in 2003.
There are several uploads on David Cope's YouTube channel featuring EMI’s music. However, most of the recordings are done with digital MIDI instruments and without any phrasing at all. Machine-like, indeed. It's interesting to open some of his videos and read the comments: some people are fascinated, some disturbed, others are barely touched by the subject.
It's possible to notice strict similarities with the 2 part inventions by J.S.Bach every once in a while, some of which were already noted by audiences in the 1980s during one of Cope’s Conferences.
It's easy to argue "the computer merely copied" if not "plagiarized", but I would be more careful examining the output. While it is true that entire bars can be identified -still, very rarely I must add- most of the time, similar ideas are put into diverse contexts from the originals thus requiring some form of intuitive reasoning (or surrogate) to apply the necessary changes for the adaptation.
Could it be that we tend to overinterpret patterns and similarities with Bach simply because we know as a fact that 1) Bach came earlier and 2) The computer is taking inspiration from it?
Similarities -part 1
EMI's Invention 2 clearly uses the same chromatic/contrary-motion-like figure as Bach's invention 6, but because the piece is set in a different tempo and key, the computer needs to figure out a way to "adapt" a similar idea to a slightly different scenario. Unlike in Bach's invention, EMI's piece does not include 32nd notes, making it perhaps exhibit its own darker and more serious atmosphere.
Similarities -part 2
Despite my gut feelings tell me to mostly credit Bach while listening to EMI, I find hard to argue there is a difference in the way music most likely might have been taught to pupils. It is widely accepted one of the main ways to learn the skill of music was indeed to copy the teacher's ideas and try to re-formulate them or put them into different contexts.
Here is the opening of Toccata and Fugue in A minor KrebsWV 411 by Johann Ludwig Krebs, one of best J.S.Bach's scholars.
Source: (https://imslp.org/wiki/Toccata_and_Fugue_in_A_minor%2C_Krebs-WV_411_(Krebs%2C_Johann_Ludwig))
Now take the F Major Toccata by J.S.Bach, BWV 540
Source (https://digitalesammlungen.bach-leipzig.de/main/thumbnailview/qsr=bwv%20540)
As none of the available Krebs WV 411 manuscripts online contains even the smallest credit to Bach from the composer, our current view of copyright is challenged.
Perhaps the piece was meant for private use only?
Perhaps the F major toccata was such a popular piece that everyone knew Bach was the original author?
Perhaps I am overseeing similarities and being superficial in assuming one composer was inspired by the previous.
Perhaps who made the art -the composer as individual- wasn't that relevant afterall because art itself was what mattered?
For a more in-depth discussion of this topic it is recommended the reading of "Musical Production Without the Work-Concept" from The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works: An Essay in the Philosophy of Music by Lydia Goehr.