• jabjoe@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 days 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…

    • Elias Griffin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      In fact just the other day information wanted a ham sandwhich before I set it free so it could find more people not on an empty stomach :/

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yes but you don’t have a right to create derivative works which by definition is all that AI can spit out.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days ago

        I am so glad humans are never derivative with culture. Just look at the movie The Fast and Furious. If we were making derivative works we would live in some crazy world where that would be a franchise with ten movies, six video games, a fashion line, board games, toys, theme park attractions, and an animated series that ran for six seasons.

    • Elias Griffin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      Oh yeah, tell me about Intellectual Property, Patent, Invention, and Ideation thievery, was it still there afterwards? IP theft has been recognized for centuries.

      Back to the basement Mustafa Jr…

  • Vanth@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    Fair use once it’s posted on the web? Thank you very much for the framework to pirate anything and everything.

  • kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days 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
      ·
      8 days 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
        ·
        8 days 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
          7 days 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
      ·
      8 days 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
        ·
        8 days 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
    ·
    7 days 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
      7 days 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?

      • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days 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.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days 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.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days 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
          ·
          7 days 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
              ·
              7 days 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
                ·
                7 days 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
    ·
    9 days ago

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