Live data from Hacker News

Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

arstechnica.com

91–100 of 471 posts

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#91
post #67
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since there is no such thing as training rights, they would have a reasonable claim.

I think it is more reasonable for content owners to say what can and cannot be done with their data. After all, content is what make AI possible, and content owners could easily start their own LLM if they wanted to since a lot of it is open source now.

That is not reasonable, should a child heed the restrictions placed on the 1st grade math book later in life, when they become PhD?

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#92
post #82
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah you mean like Google Search?

Google doesn't "vaccuum up" anything. Every site indexed by Google is still available without using Google at all. They are _copying_ information, not moving or removing it.

And how does downloading a torrent differ from that?

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#93

Well, I guess it would be nice if we could have some precedent for the claim that downloading copyright protected information is not in itself a breach of copyright. It makes sense from the point of view that distribution is the act protected by copyright, not the mere act of copying . If that sounds odd to you then that's probably on purpose, There's been plenty of opportunity to rename copyright to authorrights or…

Went the opposite direction here. Copying things for personal use was always legal in Sweden, with some exceptions (notably software, since 1986). That law was amended in 2005 (because of The Pirate Bay, presumably) to say that you are no longer allowed to make a copy from an illegally distributed copy. So if someone is illegally sharing something on the internet you are not allowed to download it.

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#94

If this was 15-20 years ago, arguably at the peak of P2P filesharing, I suspect most people would side with Meta.

In the Netherlands this is still the law.

Downloading is fine, uploading is not.

We used to have a sort of national library of every single media on Usenet back in the day.

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#95

Well, I guess it would be nice if we could have some precedent for the claim that downloading copyright protected information is not in itself a breach of copyright. It makes sense from the point of view that distribution is the act protected by copyright, not the mere act of copying . If that sounds odd to you then that's probably on purpose, There's been plenty of opportunity to rename copyright to authorrights or…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_...

"Attached to the core rights of free speech and free press are several peripheral rights that make these core rights more secure. The peripheral rights encompass not only freedom of association, including privacy in one's associations, but also, in the words of Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), "the freedom of the entire university community", i.e., the right to distribute, the right to receive, and the right to read, as well as freedom of inquiry, freedom of thought, and freedom to teach.[144]"

"The United States Constitution protects, according to the Supreme Court in Stanley v. Georgia (1969), the right to receive information and ideas, regardless of their social worth, and to be generally free from governmental intrusions into one's privacy and control of one's thoughts.[145]"

"As stated by the Court in Stanley: 'If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch. Our whole constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds.'[146]"

[144] - https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/381/479/

[145], [146] - https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/394/557/

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#96
post #53
post #3

If you download one book you're a criminal. If they download millions of books, that's just business.

Depends on your jurisdiction. In Switzerland, downloading games, books, music, movies etc. for personal use is always legal even if the copy is "pirated". Work just needs to be published in any form. Dont know any other country where it works like this.

>Dont know any other country where it works like this.

The Netherlands works the exact same.

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#98
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unfortunate side effect is that a megacorp gets to vacuum up the sum of human knowledge for free, boil it down, and sell it back to us for a nice profit.

Ah you mean like Google Search?

Google Search brings you traffic and revenue. LLMs do not.

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#99
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doesn't "vaccuum up" anything. Every site indexed by Google is still available without using Google at all. They are _copying_ information, not moving or removing it.

And how does downloading a torrent differ from that?

It does not, and both uses are fine.

Re: Meta claims torrenting pirated books isn't illegal without proof of seeding

#100
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doesn't "vaccuum up" anything. Every site indexed by Google is still available without using Google at all. They are _copying_ information, not moving or removing it.

And how does downloading a torrent differ from that?

The sites copied by Google Search explicitly allow it.

The books copied by Meta, explicitly disallow it, and require payment for distribution.

Post reply on HN