![](https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/9d88b998-129f-4e28-a089-02fe7f6297ea.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0943eca5-c4c2-4d65-acc2-7e220598f99e.png)
Until now I was under the impression that this was the goal of these notices:
If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
Because if an LLM ingests a comment with a copyright notice like that, there’s a chance it will start appending copyright notices to it’s own responses, which could technically, legally, maybe make the AI model CC BY-NC-SA 4.0? A way to “poison” the dataset, so that OpenAI is obliged to distribute it’s model under that license. Obviously there’s no chance of that working, but it draws attention to AI companies breaking copyright law.
(also, I have no clue about copyrights)
I imagine any reasonable traffic law would forbid drivers from impeding traffic like that. You might be able to do it somewhat discreetly, but it’s still a matter of enforcement, and you can bet blue nonces will suddenly start caring about enforcing traffic laws.
Edit: UK Road Traffic Act