Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 201 posts

Re: Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

#151

Post by uoaei »

omoikane wrote: post #17

It's hard to tell if what Eric Schmidt was saying was a joke, an observation, or a recommendation. One interpretation from the context of the transcript seem to be "AI can make/steal stuff and manual intervention (lawyers) can clean those up later". Another interpretation from the context of Eric Schmidt being a savvy businessman is that people should go ahead and solve all the technical challenges first, and everyth…

I can't tell if techies have fused rose-colored glasses to their faces or if they really think the people who win are nice people who follow rules!

Re: Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

#152

Post by teddyh »

tgma wrote: post #131

It’s interesting to see so many supposedly ‘hackers’ take the state of Intellectual “Property” laws that are from a different era (and are “purchased” by old incumbents too by the way) as gospel and object to strategies to deal with them for the long term. Schmidt is very pragmatic simply predicting something like that is inevitable and probably the right strategy is to build your AI thing and bet/try that something…

The problem is people at large companies creating these AI models, wanting the freedom to copy artists’ works when using it, but these large companies also want to keep copyright protection intact, for their regular business activities. They want to eat the cake and have it too. And they are arguing for essentially eliminating copyright for their specific purpose and convenience, when copyright has virtually never been loosened for the public’s convenience, even when the exceptions the public asks for are often minor and laudable. If these companies were to argue that copyright should be eliminated because of this new technology, I might not object. But now that they come and ask… no, they pretend to already have, a copyright exception for their specific use, I will happily turn around and use their own copyright maximalist arguments against them.

(Copied from a comment of mine written more than two years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33582047>)

Re: Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

#153

Post by mensetmanusman »

CatWChainsaw wrote: post #37
mensetmanusman wrote: post #24

I hope this teaches billionaires to never speak candidly to groups.

Why do you want them to hide their underhanded behavior better, allowing them to inflict more harm on everyone else?

It’s more of a tongue in cheek laying out the consequences of the student who leaked.

Re: Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

#156

Post by kelnos »

Manuel_D wrote: post #128
xivzgrev wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s dead serious. Uber got its start by flouting taxi rules. By the time the backlash started uber/lyft were too popular for governments to shut down so instead most governments created an awkward different category for them, so there’s at least some regulation applying to them. If Uber had tried to work thru the regulation they would have never gotten off the ground or have been as loved by users. Taxis in many way…

Not really. Taxi medallions are required to let you pick up someone else that hails you on the street. It is not required for a drive scheduled elsewhere like over the phone or the Internet. They weren't breaking laws, at least in the US. Most of the regulations applied to Uber were new regulations introduced after their ride to popularity, often crafted with the express purpose of curbing Lyft and Uber.

You're definitely misremembering history, then. Hailing is certainly a "category definer", but what Uber was doing in the beginning was definitely not kosher in many US jurisdictions.

Ordering on-demand in an app was seen by regulators as much more taxi-like than scheduling a black car for a particular date, time, and place.

Uber was originally called "Ubercab", and changed their name specifically to attempt to distance themselves from traditional taxi service.

Re: Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

#157

Post by izacus »

jackcosgrove wrote: post #143
gruez wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Schmidt oversaw lots of “stealing” at Google, from Google Books (Author’s Guild), to Image Search (e.g. Perfect10 etc, before even Getty), the French press .. all before Viacom vs Youtube and others. At least for Author’s Guild and Perfect10, google successfully argued fair use and therefore it wasn't really "stealing". I'm too lazy to research the other cases. Despite this, you're seemingly displeased at google's b…

Legality is the lowest bar of ethical behavior.

There's nothing ethical about calling violation of purchased IP protection "stealing" either. It's a set of laws by encumbents to protect monopolies. And you can trace a lot of US monopolies and lack of healthy competitive markets directly back to those laws.

Re: Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

#158

Post by gruez »

jackcosgrove wrote: post #143
gruez wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Schmidt oversaw lots of “stealing” at Google, from Google Books (Author’s Guild), to Image Search (e.g. Perfect10 etc, before even Getty), the French press .. all before Viacom vs Youtube and others. At least for Author’s Guild and Perfect10, google successfully argued fair use and therefore it wasn't really "stealing". I'm too lazy to research the other cases. Despite this, you're seemingly displeased at google's b…

Legality is the lowest bar of ethical behavior.

And what is your line for "ethical behavior"? What makes your line more valid than what AI companies think is ethical?

Re: Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

#159

Post by sillyfluke »

BobbyJo wrote: post #101
esafak wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you remember Napster? They went all in on getting traction, succeeded, then got crushed by the music industry. Ignoring the law only works if you are bankrolled. Don't try this at home, kids.

Yes, but how did things work out for the founders?

This is kind of an amusing point to consider since we were talking about Kim Dotcom's extradition just moments ago.

So is the point to try it if you've got Napster level success but not Megaupload level success?

And since there is no way to know which level of success you are going to achieve beforehand, the note of caution still makes sense I guess?

Re: Ex-Google CEO: AI startups can steal IP and hire lawyers to 'clean up the mess'

#160

Post by tgma »

fhd2 wrote: post #146
tgma wrote: post #131

It’s interesting to see so many supposedly ‘hackers’ take the state of Intellectual “Property” laws that are from a different era (and are “purchased” by old incumbents too by the way) as gospel and object to strategies to deal with them for the long term. Schmidt is very pragmatic simply predicting something like that is inevitable and probably the right strategy is to build your AI thing and bet/try that something…

I've skimmed the comments, but I didn't see any passionate advocacy for copyright laws. If there's rules we all need to comply with, it can be upsetting to see others proudly not do it and get away with it because they're rich. That has little to do with whether the rules were sound in the first place. It's more about fairness. And I've found "hackers" to be nothing if not fair - in a "chaotic good" way perhaps.

So you define "fairness" as always following the rules as is.

That's objectively false. Many historical examples.

Post reply on HN