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

Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

variety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 484 posts

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#211

Post by spongebobstoes »

ipython wrote: post #198
spongebobstoes wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aaron Swartz was treated unjustly because copyright sucks. we should oppose such laws and treatment, not wield them as retributive tools against our opponents it is wrong to advocate for everyone to be treated equally unjustly. better to advocate for the removal of the bad laws/structures

It would be easier to advocate for the reform of those laws if they were actually applied evenly. I’m not calling for its use as a “retributive tool”. Just that it be applied evenly.

advocating for more punishment under copyright law is directly opposed to reform or removal of the laws

court precedent is a useful tool of advocacy

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#212

Post by stiray »

modeless wrote: post #180

Funny how people are suddenly on Elsevier's side. It's clear to me that AI training is transformative fair use under existing law. Maybe this will be the case to prove it.

It actually depends on evilness of the company. Elsevier is just less evil that Zuckerberg and Meta, while publishers are even less problematic. I dont think there is anything funny in that.

Or anything to defend on Meta. If they go out of business, humanity profits.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#213

Post by naniwaduni »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #170
naniwaduni wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People seem to get the weird idea that borrowing against their stock holdings is some special thing rich people get to do with products that the rest of us don't have access to. It's not. Margin loans are widely available to the tune of ff+1%ish or lower, and if your brokerage's publicly offered rates are probably a ripoff, they're almost certainly negotiable. The bar for access to "institutional" rates is basically…

I think people take issue with the taxes loophole. They have GAINED from the VALUE of their stocks, but they don't pay taxes on that. It should be law if you realize value from stocks you pay capital gains on those stocks. So if a loan is collateralized by $1,000,000 worth of stock value taxes should be paid on $1,000,000.

The trouble is that a bank is not lending against the nominal value of the stock as collateral. That number is almost entirely fictional. Taxation of capital gains at time of sale is less a loophole than a reflection of the difficulty of assigning a fair price to assets that are not perfectly liquid.

Also, you'd totally gut retail home equity lending as collateral damage, with disastrous social policy consequences.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#214

Post by agnosticmantis »

soundworlds wrote: post #159

I should hope that if Zuckerberg isn't severely punished for this, it at least sets a legal precedent for every other person to do the same with immunity. All the Aaron Schwartzes of the future could freely share scientific papers with the world.

Willing to bet they'll lobby for regulatory capture and raise the drawbridge for the little guys.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#215

Post by 2ndorderthought »

eloisius wrote: post #190
modeless wrote: post #180

Funny how people are suddenly on Elsevier's side. It's clear to me that AI training is transformative fair use under existing law. Maybe this will be the case to prove it.

I find it grating that so many AI boosters try to frame pushing back against the AI industry as a sudden about-face for everyone that spent the last 20 years pushing back against the copyright industry. I’m also in favor of decriminalizing or legalizing small amounts of pot for personal use. That doesn’t mean I’m behind industrialized narcotic production on such a huge scale that it that it starts to distort the econ…

Speaking of ai and meth, have you seen videos of the palantir CEO Alex karp? Dude looks like he's regularly getting the same meth shots Hitler used to get.

But I hear you. One of my biggest tells that someone can't be reasoned with is when they resort to whataboutism without any consideration for how 2 situations can actually be different even if there is some commonality. It's a powerful bad faith argument technique. When that style of argument comes up I nod my head and walk away. Some people are just doomed.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#216

Post by 2ndorderthought »

whattheheckheck wrote: post #208
modeless wrote: post #180

Funny how people are suddenly on Elsevier's side. It's clear to me that AI training is transformative fair use under existing law. Maybe this will be the case to prove it.

If i could ask for a summary from an llm vs buy a book id go with the summary. That eats into commercial use and the supreme court case sided with Gerald Ford when a newspaper published a small gist of his autobiography because it ate into the sales

Yea nope. I like the full book without any loss of information. Even if I don't want to read the entire book. LLMs love to respond even when something is outside of their training set.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#217

Post by ipython »

spongebobstoes wrote: post #211
ipython wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be easier to advocate for the reform of those laws if they were actually applied evenly. I’m not calling for its use as a “retributive tool”. Just that it be applied evenly.

advocating for more punishment under copyright law is directly opposed to reform or removal of the laws court precedent is a useful tool of advocacy

Technically he wasn’t charged with any copyright violations. See indictment: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/217117-united-states...

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#218

Post by stackghost »

modeless wrote: post #180

Funny how people are suddenly on Elsevier's side. It's clear to me that AI training is transformative fair use under existing law. Maybe this will be the case to prove it.

I'm not on Elsevier's side, but I still think it's bullshit that giant companies are allowed to do things at a scale that I'd go to prison for.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#219

Post by happytoexplain »

modeless wrote: post #180

Funny how people are suddenly on Elsevier's side. It's clear to me that AI training is transformative fair use under existing law. Maybe this will be the case to prove it.

"Funny" is how dishonest snipes are framed. It such a common trope of internet quips, it's wearing me out. Can we please try to just format our disagreements without the snideness?

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#220

Post by Larrikin »

whattheheckheck wrote: post #208
modeless wrote: post #180

Funny how people are suddenly on Elsevier's side. It's clear to me that AI training is transformative fair use under existing law. Maybe this will be the case to prove it.

If i could ask for a summary from an llm vs buy a book id go with the summary. That eats into commercial use and the supreme court case sided with Gerald Ford when a newspaper published a small gist of his autobiography because it ate into the sales

Every single Wikipedia article of a book or TV show has this summary. Ford should have lost.
Post reply on HN