Is A.I. The Death of I.P.? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#61

Post by throwboatyface » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:07 PM UTC

mlsu wrote: post #43

Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting copyright law is not like subverting the laws of physics. What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (copyright) for the real resource (money), through licensing or fines. Debate about what AI means for copyright is really a debate about what we choose to…

Stop signs are made up too. See how far you get driving through all of them without stopping.

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#62

Post by wahnfrieden » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:08 PM UTC

tilwidnk wrote: post #59

mlsu wrote: post #43

Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting copyright law is not like subverting the laws of physics. What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (copyright) for the real resource (money), through licensing or fines. Debate about what AI means for copyright is really a debate about what we choose to…

> Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Now, I don't have a college degree, but with my 60+ years life experience I can say, yes, copyright is a real thing, it protects people who create, from assholes and AI.

It's not real beyond what the parent post described, which is an expectation that the state will use guns and cages in reaction to certain behaviors

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#63

Post by gumballindie » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:08 PM UTC

tilwidnk wrote: post #59

mlsu wrote: post #43

Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting copyright law is not like subverting the laws of physics. What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (copyright) for the real resource (money), through licensing or fines. Debate about what AI means for copyright is really a debate about what we choose to…

> Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Now, I don't have a college degree, but with my 60+ years life experience I can say, yes, copyright is a real thing, it protects people who create, from assholes and AI.

Am I the only one that loves a blunt and honest comment?

Funny how advocates against property rights have no issue with corporations protecting their own. That’s fine. What they want is to legally steal from the average joe.

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#64

Post by tenebrisalietum » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:10 PM UTC

mlsu wrote: post #43

Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting copyright law is not like subverting the laws of physics. What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (copyright) for the real resource (money), through licensing or fines. Debate about what AI means for copyright is really a debate about what we choose to…

U.S. copyright also has a constitutionally defined purpose:

`[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.`

Does the current scheme really promote the progress of science and useful arts? Is the current length of copyright really "limited Times"?

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#65

Post by k__ » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:10 PM UTC

throwboatyface wrote: post #61

mlsu wrote: post #43

Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting copyright law is not like subverting the laws of physics. What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (copyright) for the real resource (money), through licensing or fines. Debate about what AI means for copyright is really a debate about what we choose to…

Stop signs are made up too. See how far you get driving through all of them without stopping.

But they have a point.

Copyright law is already different from country to country.

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#66

Post by ricardo81 » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:10 PM UTC

mlsu wrote: post #43

Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting copyright law is not like subverting the laws of physics. What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (copyright) for the real resource (money), through licensing or fines. Debate about what AI means for copyright is really a debate about what we choose to…

>What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one

That just seems like a sociopathic argument to circumvent perfectly clear laws intended to protect people who expend energy into offering new ideas and also trying to diminish what is already delineated as right and wrong. In the blatant sense.

I'm not sure how your gun analogy funnels along to fair use.

As with anyone who doesn't seem to respect copyright laws, I'd say to them, give me a copy of everything useful you've ever done in your life. Going by the same rule.

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#67

Post by peab » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:11 PM UTC

ricardo81 wrote: post #18

It's been dead a while because of big tech. YouTube, Google, Facebook, Twitter - they have no way of effectively managing IP and so you basically see people's stolen content and they monetise it, so TBF Napster and torrents are another and earlier angle. Purely IMO, big tech normalised the taking of other people's content, and it's getting to the point where content creators (as in, ones that are capable of producing…

That's not true at all - content ID on Youtube works quite well, and the Music Industry has strong ties to Youtube

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#68

Post by kopecs » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:12 PM UTC

mlsu wrote: post #43

Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting copyright law is not like subverting the laws of physics. What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (copyright) for the real resource (money), through licensing or fines. Debate about what AI means for copyright is really a debate about what we choose to…

Do you not believe that societal constructs are real? What makes (fiat) money a real resource and copyright an imaginary one? What about this logic:

Debt is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting contract law is not like subverting the laws of physics. Simply don't pay your bills! What happens when you subvert contract law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (money) for the real resource (labor), through a contract.

It's a bit of clever misdirection to declare yourself "in debt" or "debt free." Money is made up! It's fiction! It is whatever we want it to be!

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#69

Post by k__ » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:12 PM UTC

neonsunset wrote: post #51

dandellion wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was no other outcome possible from the moment we invented a technology that allowed everybody to create infinite copies of digital content at almost zero cost. If tomorrow we discovered a source of infinite free energy, oil and energy companies could try anything they wanted, their current business model would end up obsolete sooner or later.

Just look at what happened to nuclear energy :)

So, nuclear proponents are now going so far to call the catastrophes of the past a big oil psyops?

Re: Is A.I. The Death of I.P.?

#70

Post by wahnfrieden » Wed, Jan 17, 2024, 7:13 PM UTC

ricardo81 wrote: post #66

mlsu wrote: post #43

Copyright is not a real thing. It's a fiction. Subverting copyright law is not like subverting the laws of physics. What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one, force a trade of your imaginary resource (copyright) for the real resource (money), through licensing or fines. Debate about what AI means for copyright is really a debate about what we choose to…

>What happens when you subvert copyright law is some guys with guns, in either an overt way or a subtle one That just seems like a sociopathic argument to circumvent perfectly clear laws intended to protect people who expend energy into offering new ideas and also trying to diminish what is already delineated as right and wrong. In the blatant sense. I'm not sure how your gun analogy funnels along to fair use. As wit…

Most copyrights are not held by the people who expended energy into the labor of producing new work, they're held by the employers of that labor. Most people have no practical choice in finding the means for their survival but through wage labor and selling the ownership of what they produce.