this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
190 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

66353 readers
4345 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] -5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I never suggested or implied that copyright laws need to be removed.

It does appear that OpenAI's position is "copyright laws are dumb and need to be changed" which, during the Aaron Schwartz story, was the position of the community.

Now, since the entity involved is an AI company, we're seeing people who're on the side of using copyright laws to punish infringers because they don't like AI.

Either copyright laws need to be changed or they don't need to be changed. Someone's position on the topic shouldn't change based on who is being negatively effected by said laws.

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

People are being cynical about the laws applying equally to Big Corps vs regular people.

If we make a special case for abolishing copyright if it means you're training an AI model, does that mean that now everyone can download copyrighted material if they do some form of locally hosted training?

The answer will probably end up being: one rule for the corporations and another for individuals.