@fazalmajid@social.vivaldi.net
Post #4329926
2026-07-31 09:05 UTC
@bert_hubert@eupolicy.social
The intellectual property argument against AI is the one I find most puzzling. We were on the losing side of the copyfight with publishers, music labels and film studios passing draconian laws like DMCA trampling over fair use, or in France extorting a tax on all storage so a portion of the cost of your MRI goes to Taylor Swift (or Carla Bruni). They have also extended copyright terms beyond all reasonable justification.
They are all marginal businesses that barely register in economic statistics, but with disproportionate cultural influence so the tail wags the dog, and we seem to have internalized their specious argument that copyright infringement is tantamount to theft. Here in England, they have even molded the school CS curriculum to indoctrinate children early.
Fortunately US courts have consistently ruled training LLMs on copyrighted content is sufficiently transformative to be fair use, and I applaud them putting the copyright lobby back in its place.
Replies (1)
-
@EI9FEB@mastodon.radio 2026-08-01 21:37
@fazalmajid@social.vivaldi.net @bert_hubert@eupolicy.social "Fortunately US courts have consistently ruled training LLMs on copyrighted content is sufficiently transformative to be fair use, and I applaud them putting the copyright lobby back in its place." Nonsense. It's IP theft. The DMCA is wrong, extending copyright is wrong (Disney & Friends) and the earlier ruling permitting Google scanning is wrong. The USA courts & USPTO are broken. Serve USA Corps, not creatives.