VAT for content should be a thing. Ultimately all users should be getting paid
X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
81–90 of 217 posts
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
The burden is on the user to show that it is fair use, no? Not everyone else's responsibility to prove that it's _not_ fair use.
It is definitely the responsibility of anyone suing someone who trained a model on copyrighted data to prove that it isn't fair use, they have to show how it violated law, and while it's in the best interest of those organizations to make things easier for the court by showing why it is fair use, they are technically innocent until proven guilty. Accordingly, anyone on the internet who wants to make comments about ho…
> It is definitely the responsibility of anyone suing someone who trained a model on copyrighted data to prove that it isn't fair use, they have to show how it violated law, and while it's in the best interest of those organizations to make things easier for the court by showing why it is fair use, they are technically innocent until proven guilty.
No, fair use is an affirmative defense for conduct that would otherwise be infringing. The onus is on the defendant to show that their use was fair.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#83VAT for content should be a thing. Ultimately all users should be getting paid
So I get to use the platform for free, but I also get paid to post on the platform? I'm not sure that makes sense. Like I hate to take the side of big tech, but they can't literally be paying users to use their platform. Just use something else, there are a million social media sites
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#84VAT for content should be a thing. Ultimately all users should be getting paid
So I get to use the platform for free, but I also get paid to post on the platform? I'm not sure that makes sense. Like I hate to take the side of big tech, but they can't literally be paying users to use their platform. Just use something else, there are a million social media sites
Google indexes your website for free, and it will pay you to put ads in it.
That's also what all social media do , they put ads on your thoughts. They dont even need to index your thoughts because you submit them directly. It has nothing to do with being free, it's about incentives. Users are so foolish , they give everything for free, unlike webmasters.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#85VAT for content should be a thing. Ultimately all users should be getting paid
So I get to use the platform for free, but I also get paid to post on the platform? I'm not sure that makes sense. Like I hate to take the side of big tech, but they can't literally be paying users to use their platform. Just use something else, there are a million social media sites
You don’t use the platform for free, unless you’re using an ad blocker. But that’s also, probably, against the TOS?
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#86VAT for content should be a thing. Ultimately all users should be getting paid
So I get to use the platform for free, but I also get paid to post on the platform? I'm not sure that makes sense. Like I hate to take the side of big tech, but they can't literally be paying users to use their platform. Just use something else, there are a million social media sites
> I get to use the platform for free
You actually get to generate content for the platform for free.
Without you (all of the X users), the platform would be devoid of content, just botspeak and corporate promos.
Plus, as the sibling mentioned, they monetize your visit through ads (and data use).
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#87Oh, that must be nice. And what should I do as a blogger to get the same privilege for my content? We are in an age of corporate “piracy for me, but not for thee.”
> We are in an age of corporate “piracy for me, but not for thee.”
Rather, we are back to that age of state- (now corporate-) backed privateering.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If there were no copyright protection, these works wouldn't have been created. Citation needed. You can freely copy and distribute linux and it still got made.
The GP wasn't referring to DRM or DMCA type "copyright protection" as the phrase is typically used. Nobody in this thread has mentioned any of that. The GP is referring to legal protections, and guess what? Linux is legally protected by copyright! Linux is legally protected by copyright! Linux is legally protected by copyright! Nearly every GPL license--every one that we could name--protects a copyrighted work! Nearl…
Yeah, I think most of us are fine with 50 years old Linux kernel being released into public domain.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#89Right, stealing training data from others is OK, having it stolen from you is not. What else is new?
New logo every couple of years and Bob's your uncle.
Re: X changes its terms to bar training of AI models using its content
#90It would be interesting to have a "classical AI model", trained on the contents of the Harvard libraries before 1926 and now out of copyright.
Careful, you might create an artificial superintelligence that way. Safer to just train on the Twitter dataset.
that’s how you end up with an Artificial Idiot.