• kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Pirating Windows for your own personal, private use, which will never directly make you a single dollar: HIGHLY ILLEGAL

    Scraping your creative works so they can make billions by selling automated processes that compete against your work: Perfectly fine and normal!

    • yesman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Do people still pirate Windows? You can download the iso directly from Microsoft’s website and you don’t need a registration key anymore.

      • Scrollone@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You do need a registration key, but now it’s tied to the hardware so it activates as soon as you connect to the network, no need to actually type the registration key.

        • Balder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          They’re saying Windows will lock away some customization, but you don’t need a key to use it nowadays.

    • experbia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      bunch of fuckin art pirates. crying about software piracy while they have their own bots pirating everyone’s art.

      • kibiz0r@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s not even piracy though. I never saw anyone torrent Windows_XP_Home_Cracked.iso and go “Hey guys, check out this operating system I made!”

  • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Copyright infrigment is not theft, training models is not copyright infringement either. We need a law equivalent to when an artist says “he’s inpired by someone else” . That it specifically is illegal to do that without permission if you use a machine. That will force big tech to pay a pittance for it and it will instakill all the small player.

    • Elias Griffin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Copyright Infringment strawman argument. When considering AI, we are not talking legal copyright infringement in the relationship between humans vs AI. Humans are mostly concerned with being obsoleted by Big Tech so the real issue is Intellectual Property Theft.

      artificial INTELLIGENCE stole our Intellectual Property

      Do you see it now?

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        What I see is a system of laws that came about during the Middle Ages and have been manipulated by the powers that be to kill off any good parts of them.

        We all knew copyright was broken. It was broken before my grandparents were born. It didn’t encourage artists or promise them proper income, it didn’t allow creations to gradually move into public domain. It punished all forms of innovation from player pianos to fanfiction on Tumblr.

      • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s only theft as long as you cling to the failed “copyright” model.

        Big tech couldn’t steal anything if we don’t respect their property rights in the first place.

        By reifying copyright under the AI paradigm, we maintain big tech’s power over us.

        The truth is chatgpt belong to us. ClosedAI is just the compiler of the data.

        If we finally end the failed experiment of copyright, we destroy their mote.

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Creating a derivative work without a license to do so would be copyright infringement.

  • jabjoe@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I can see a lot of comments against copyright here, but has anyone considered the implications of changes to copyright on copyleft?

    I argue copyleft is demonstrably socially useful in locking things open. I do wonder if we’ll end up the two being different legally…

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Microsoft AI boss Mustafa Suleyman incorrectly believes that the moment you publish anything on the open web, it becomes “freeware” that anyone can freely copy and use.

    When CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin asked him whether “AI companies have effectively stolen the world’s IP,” he said:

    That certainly hasn’t kept many AI companies from claiming that training on copyrighted content is “fair use,” but most haven’t been as brazen as Suleyman when talking about it.

    Speaking of brazen, he’s got a choice quote about the purpose of humanity shortly after his “fair use” remark:

    Suleyman does seem to think there’s something to the robots.txt idea — that specifying which bots can’t scrape a particular website within a text file might keep people from taking its content.

    Disclosure: Vox Media, The Verge’s parent company, has a technology and content deal with OpenAI.


    The original article contains 351 words, the summary contains 139 words. Saved 60%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

        • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Impressive that your coworkers discuss the events exclusively by recalling 60% of the announcer’s words and then quoting them verbatim.

            • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I got the math the wrong way around but read the bottom of the bot’s post. The bot’s job is to cut the fluff out of articles, and it copy/pastes the remaining text for us to read here.

              So my comment should have said 40%, but the point was if we’re comparing what the bot did with your coworkers talking about a game, it’d be more akin to them reciting the commentator verbatim.

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                I thought that even discussing the game without the express permission of the media company you used to watch and the sports league was a violation. Not sure why you are bringing commentary on commentary in it. Again not a sports ball guy but when I do hear people talk about sports they are talking about sports not the person talkimg about sports.

  • dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Just yet another proof, that the more 0’s you have in your valuation, the less the laws apply to you

  • CriticalMiss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Sure bud, pirating some Microsoft Studio video games and windows ISOs right now. What? I found them on the open web!

    • bruhduh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I mean, Xbox one/series recently got proof of concept jailbreak, so… I think many people are on board with your thought

  • Brickardo@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Does Netflix count as the open web? It definitely feels like so, but I’m ready for a wealth hoarder to tell me otherwise!

  • WallEx@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    So its no longer intellectual property if its on the internet? The nerves on this guy…

    So you could just copy and use every single helpful support article from Microsoft?

    Oh shit, there aren’t any

    • ayaya@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      If the model isn’t overfitted it’s also not even copying. By their nature LLMs are transformative which is the whole point of fair use.

    • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Yeah, I’m not a fan of AI but I’m generally of the view that anything posted on the internet, visible without a login, is fair game for indexing a search engine, snapshotting a backup (like the internet archive’s Wayback Machine), or running user extensions on (including ad blockers). Is training an AI model all that different?

      • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        None of those things replace that content, though.

        Look, I dunno if this is legally a copyrights issue, but as a society, I think a lot of people have decided they’re willing to yield to social media and search engine indexers, but not to AI training, you know? The same way I might consent to eating a mango but not a banana.

      • Evotech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        You can’t be for piracy but against LLMs fair the same reason

        And I think most of the people on Lemmy are for piracy,

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Issue is power imbalance.

      There’s a clear difference between a guy in his basement on his personal computer sampling music the original musicians almost never seen a single penny from, and a megacorp trying to drive out creative professionals from the industry in the hopes they can then proceed to hike up the prices to use their generative AI software.

    • Zacryon@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yes. Exactly. Although there isn’t much left worth stealing from Microsoft.

      (This was a low-key “Microsoft bad, Linux supreme”, comment.)

      (And now it’s no longer low-key.)

      (I’m using a touch-screen keyboard for writing this. And yet I can’t open my doors using the keyboard. Ever wondered why that is?)

      (Correct, because I forgot my keys at home and didn’t put them on my keyboard.)

      (Now it’s just a –board.)

      (Oral diarrhea over. Go get some guhd Linux!)