Paul McCartney and Dua Lipa urge UK Prime Minister to rethink his AI copyright plans. A new law could soon allow AI companies to use copyrighted material without permission.
Technology
97
Beiträge
51
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
A new law could soon allow AI companies to use copyrighted material without permission.
Good. Copyright and patent laws need to die.
All the money wasted enforcing them and taken from customers could be better spent on other things.
Creators will still create, as they always have. We just won't have millionaire scumbags such as 'paul mccartney' living like kings while children starve.
Lol everything you create will now be stolen by Disney who will own the only organizations that can reach an audience.
Thanks for giving them free money forever just so you can spite people with actual talent.
-
This is 100% correct. You can downvote this person all you want but their not wrong!
A painter doesn't own anything to the estate of Rembrandt because they took inspiration from his paintings.
So if you take away all the copywrited training data then it makes the same images?
-
Lol everything you create will now be stolen by Disney who will own the only organizations that can reach an audience.
Thanks for giving them free money forever just so you can spite people with actual talent.
How is disney going to make its money without copyright and patent laws?
How will their movies sell if it's legal for anyone to copy and redistribute them?
How will they make as much money off of merchandise if they have to legally compete with people who don't hold copyrights to their IP?
The only "Lol" here is how proud you people are for being useful idiots. This is why things are the way they are.
-
Things like rent won't be so expensive because landlords will have less of an excuse to charge customers more money. So, in essence you're not even arguing for compensating creators for their work; you're arguing for compensating their feudal lords.
when one of those much bigger corporations you seem to hate simply steal their work and profit off of it?
Corporations will also make less money because there are no copyright and patent laws. Your cognitive dissonance is on full display here.
This is how we put more money in the hands of the working class. It''s sad watching you fight tooth and nail against it just as you've been conditioned to do.
You're moving the goal posts and making assumptions.
Please address my question how do you propose any intellectual entity be compensated to their creator without any kind of theft protection?
Also leave you naive childish and idiotic anti-whatever proselytizing for you racist uncle over thanksgiving dinner.
-
So if you take away all the copywrited training data then it makes the same images?
No. And that's the point...
-
You're moving the goal posts and making assumptions.
Please address my question how do you propose any intellectual entity be compensated to their creator without any kind of theft protection?
Also leave you naive childish and idiotic anti-whatever proselytizing for you racist uncle over thanksgiving dinner.
I'm not moving any goalposts nor am I making any assumptions. You are upset because rather than learn from your cognitive dissonance, you attack the person who calls it out.
Also leave you naive childish and idiotic anti-whatever proselytizing for you racist uncle over thanksgiving dinner.
Hey, you're the one who's arguing to exacerbate the disparity in wealth. Not me.
-
Nazism was hugely popular in Germany in the early 20th century, but was it a good thing?
You do realize the root of this thread was this question, right?
why do you say AI is a universally regarded negative?
In the early 20th century, Nazism was not a universally regarded negative.
-
Because pretty much nobody wants it or likes it.
I think you're mistaken -- there are a large number of people who vehemently dislike it, why is probably why you think that.
-
I genuinely feel like I'm talking to a wall here.
That's because you don't understand what copyright legally is.
-
Torrent means you download and also upload to others when you have some parts.
No, not really. First of all, you can disable uploads. Second, you can use a seed box hosted in a country which doesn't prosecute uploaders. So, you can be clean for all legal intents and purposes.
-
Oh I agree money talks in the US justice system, but as the page shows, these laws also exist elsewhere, such as in the EU. And even if I or you don't agree with them, they are still the case law that determines the legality of these things. For me that aligns with my ethical stance as well, but probably not yours.
I know they exist outside the US. I'm European. But there are too many terms of use that say that in case of problems they go to courts in the US that they will do everything on their hand to do the sameifn this case.
-
No, not really. First of all, you can disable uploads. Second, you can use a seed box hosted in a country which doesn't prosecute uploaders. So, you can be clean for all legal intents and purposes.
Except the default is sharing. So, if you disable the upload you are leeching on purpose. That can be used against you in court. You did what you did for profit and not for sharing.
️ -
No. And that's the point...
So if it can't function properly without other people's work deciding what the art will look like that's called copying.
If human beings get shit for copying famous art or tracing we need to hold AI to the same standard.
-
How is disney going to make its money without copyright and patent laws?
How will their movies sell if it's legal for anyone to copy and redistribute them?
How will they make as much money off of merchandise if they have to legally compete with people who don't hold copyrights to their IP?
The only "Lol" here is how proud you people are for being useful idiots. This is why things are the way they are.
Because they have the money to advertise all of the better financed projects they would be allowed to steal.
Wanting copywright to be gone means you intend to steal from others, you aren't robin hood lol
