Live data from Hacker News

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

variety.com

271–280 of 484 posts

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

#271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Violation of these rights may be criminal without meeting the strict legal definition of theft. This can even extend to stealing physical property. Depending on local laws, stealing a car may not actually be theft if the defendent can prove they intended to return it before the owner got home from work, though it would certainly be considered theft in the colloquial sense of the term, and they would still be guilty o…

> Depending on local laws, stealing a car may not actually be theft if the defendent can prove they intended to return it before the owner got home from work I doubt there's even one place where the law works like that.

> I doubt there's even one place where the law works like that.

In a lot of places, that's how it works. A key element of theft is the intent to permanently deprive someone of property.

This is why joyriding isn't classified as auto theft and is instead a lesser offense. It's because joyriding is an intent to temporarily deprive, while GTA is an intent to permanently deprive.

In some jxns (the UK is one), there is a tort called trespass to goods, and an example of this would be "stealing" someone's property to deliver to another location for them to use there. The tort of conversion is similar: interference with someone's property right to treat it as your own (silent as to length of time).

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

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's frustrating is all those kids who got criminal charges for running MP3 sites back in the day [1], and this guy rips off every piece of media in existence and will walk away literally because he's too rich to be charged. [1] See, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oink%27s_Pink_Palace#Legal_pro...

What's frustrating is that I don't even consider infringement to be a crime. Why are you all so upset about this, rather than his real crimes?

Because the rich can do it and we can’t.

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

#273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of the things I wrote are already happening. The others probably are but haven't been reported yet.

I think Anthorpic has pledged to not use team and enterprise user's data for training purposes. I don't mind if they do some verification or whatever as long as it doesn't end up in the responses it gives others.

yes yes and google pledged "don't be evil"

Don't be naïve. A corporation would tear the flesh from your body if it meant a better quarterly earnings report.

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

#274

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.

Such a garbage take. This is not a parody or a critique. Mark Zuckerberg is not Weird Al Yankovic.

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

#275

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.

That's always going to be true for the Capitalist class.

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

#276
post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. That's not to say that something damaging wasn't done, but nothing was stolen. Stealing/theft requires deprivation of property. It's like receiving a normal nonlethal punch in the face and calling it murder. Murder requires someone dying. > Theft [...] is the act of taking another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it. --- ht…

My God, I can't believe chodes are still playing this "how many angels can you fit on the head of a pin" navel gazing semantic argument. Thirty years at least, it was all you saw on fin de ciecle Slashdot from anyone with a six-digit UID. No one cares about your hyper literalist meaning of "theft," that's not the goddamn point. Christ, this place looks like Reddit more and more. This isn't a court of law. We don't ha…

Even the case for copyright infringement is weak. LLMs are not copying machines, we already have copying machines at much lower price, almost zero, and perfect fidelity and much faster than generating it probabilistically. So it makes no economic sense to spend billions on training and inference to make a copier. In fact the value of LLMs is where they do not copy but apply knowledge a new situation.

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

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's frustrating is that I don't even consider infringement to be a crime. Why are you all so upset about this, rather than his real crimes?

Because the rich can do it and we can’t.

I do it literally all the time.

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

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also find it funny, I said this regarding the other thread and article[0] '"They then copied those stolen fruits" How are these fruits "stolen" if they still have what was allegedley stolen? Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207 (1985): The Supreme Court ruled that the unauthorized sale of phonorecords of copyrighted musical compositions does not constitute "stolen, converted or taken by fraud" goods under the Nat…

>How are these fruits "stolen" if they still have what was allegedley stolen? If you write a book and I take it and embed its knowledge into my product that is so pervasive that no one needs to buy your book any more (and I don't even credit you so no one knows where that knowledge came from), to you really still have what was stolen? And I didn't even buy a copy of your book to copy it.

> If you write a book and I take it and embed its knowledge into my product that is so pervasive that no one needs to buy your book any more (and I don't even credit you so no one knows where that knowledge came from), to you really still have what was stolen?

The trouble with this analogy is that it proves too much.

Suppose you write a book, and so does someone else, but they have better marketing than you and then people in the market for that genre buy theirs instead of yours. Let's even stipulate that the existence of their book actually lowers your sales, because people who want that kind of book already bought theirs by the time they find out about yours and then some people don't have time to read or can't afford to buy both.

Notice that we haven't yet said a word about the contents of either book. They could be completely independent and they've never even heard of you or your book -- they "didn't even buy a copy of your book to copy it". All we know is that they're the same genre and the existence of theirs is costing you sales. By that logic all competition would thereby be "stealing", and that can't be right.

Which implies that you don't have a property right to the customers.

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

#280
post #158
post #36

Just gonna say... Aaron Swartz faced years of prison time and ultimately decided to take his own life... for downloading scientific journal articles ... to share freely with the world (aka not even profiting from it). But a multi-billion dollar corporation downloading millions of copyrighted creative works so that they can reshape the entire labor market by training a new type of artificial intelligence model on that…

One man illegally downloading copyrighted material is a crime. Multinational corporations illegally downloading copyrighted material is the only remaining growth area in the US economy and vital to national security.

They should make another one of those PSAs. "You wouldn't steal 10,000,000 cars".
Post reply on HN