Comment by CamperBob2
1 day ago
Amazing how many copyright maximalists there are on a site called "Hacker News."
Seems to be a fairly recent trend. Wonder what changed.
1 day ago
Amazing how many copyright maximalists there are on a site called "Hacker News."
Seems to be a fairly recent trend. Wonder what changed.
Nothing changed on my case (and many others), is that perhaps you never grasped the big picture of our view, in that copyright law should be soft against consumers that violate it (for non-profit reasons) and hard against corporations that do.
Let's see if training a model is actually considered a copyright violation. I don't know that, and neither do you.
If it is adjudicated to be a violation, well, that's the end of copyright, for better or worse. AI is more important. Don't fight to lock down information; fight for equitable access instead.
What changed is that copyright violation used to be something individuals did quietly, and got punished for. Now it’s something big companies are doing openly and they’re getting tons of money for it and zero consequences.
"Copyright violation?" That remains to be seen, doesn't it? Which court do you sit on, and how many trillions of dollars in future value do you feel comfortable tossing away?
The copyright industry has done all it can for us, even in the most charitable interpretation. They literally, by constitutional mandate, can't be allowed to stand in the way of progress. We're not talking Napster 2.0 here.
You’re going to give me shit for calling out a clear copyright violation because I’m not a judge, and yet you feel comfortable saying that it’s unconstitutional(?!) to stand in their way? What court do you sit on?