1234
this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
1234 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
59579 readers
6183 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I feel more and more justified about piracy every article I read about licensing and stuff just getting taken away after having paid good money for stuff
Especially since they suddenly become not so sure when talking about feeding things under IP to "AIs". It seems that when some process is not too open, like dataset collection, people doing it get used to bending laws they themselves rely on.
Actually this should be leveraged.
One approach - IP is solid, so those big companies championing "AIs" will have to pay royalties for everything produced by an "AI" which had been fed something of that IP. That's just logically a Gordian knot.
Another approach - IP is an artificial concept which is complete bullshit, then "digital piracy" is not a crime, and neither is commercialization of fan works over some IP without paying royalties.
Anything in between would mean that a company has more rights under the law than an individual. Would be a good analogy to cutting that knot IMHO, but a bad outcome.