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

H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 143 posts

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#41

Post by anigbrowl »

roenxi wrote: post #35
anigbrowl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No surprise that you'd show up to shill for it.Your argument boils down to 'if it looks like an executive branch agency, then the Executive branch should have control over it' rather than accepting that Congress is free to set things up as it sees fit within the Constitutional constraints.

Hypothetically, if Congress passed legislation saying "it looks like an executive branch agency, the Executive branch should have control over it" you'd consider that a generally reasonable position all else equal? If you concede that it looks like an executive agency then it actually seems quite proper that the executive control it.

No. Congress can set up and modify different parts of the executive branch, but can also set up wholly independent agencies that are not parts of the executive branch. The current administration often argues (through legal filings or proxies) that such agencies are somehow illegitimate and the executive branch should have authority over everything. That idea isn't peculiar to this administration, they just seem to have gone all-in on 'unitary executive theory' because it provides arguments for consolidating as much power as possible in the office of the Presidency.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#42

Post by 8note »

roenxi wrote: post #35
anigbrowl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No surprise that you'd show up to shill for it.Your argument boils down to 'if it looks like an executive branch agency, then the Executive branch should have control over it' rather than accepting that Congress is free to set things up as it sees fit within the Constitutional constraints.

Hypothetically, if Congress passed legislation saying "it looks like an executive branch agency, the Executive branch should have control over it" you'd consider that a generally reasonable position all else equal? If you concede that it looks like an executive agency then it actually seems quite proper that the executive control it.

youd also have to consider that the executive branch isn't allowed to make decisions, so the copyright office couldnt actually do anything, unless congress specifically passed a law saying a certain work has or does not have copyright protections, and which specific protections.

no more major questions doctrine

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#44

Post by bigstrat2003 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #30

Odd that the article doesn't mention parties at all, although perhaps this was in an attempt to avoid accusations of partisanship that might ensue from stating facts. Anyway, a quick look at https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6028... indicates that all 4 sponsors of the bill are Republicans. The Actions tab seems to indicated that the bill got only 12 minutes of debate before being passed,; I hop…

The article doesn't mention parties because it's irrelevant. A bad bill is bad on its merits, not because of who has brought it about.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#45

Post by roenxi »

bradleyjg wrote: post #36
roenxi wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It suppose I can see "executive power should be part of the executive branch" as a facile argument because it does seem basic and a bit tautological, but it is still quite a strong point. It needs to be addressed rather than just identified and dismissed.

I suppose in that case you are wholly opposed to the regulatory system as legislative power should be part of the legislative branch?

Well, probably in theory. I don't rate that on my top 50 issues I care about and haven't given the idea much thought. But having the legislative branch be responsible for the regulatory system does sound proper.

The US executive branch has very limited decision making bandwidth and it should really be reserved for matters of war and peace.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#46

Post by roenxi »

anigbrowl wrote: post #41
roenxi wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hypothetically, if Congress passed legislation saying "it looks like an executive branch agency, the Executive branch should have control over it" you'd consider that a generally reasonable position all else equal? If you concede that it looks like an executive agency then it actually seems quite proper that the executive control it.

No. Congress can set up and modify different parts of the executive branch, but can also set up wholly independent agencies that are not parts of the executive branch. The current administration often argues (through legal filings or proxies) that such agencies are somehow illegitimate and the executive branch should have authority over everything. That idea isn't peculiar to this administration, they just seem to ha…

The current administration doesn't seem to be involved in this. This appears to be Congress, on paper, saying that the executive should control something that looks like an executive agency.

I can see how someone might disagree with that for various reasons (see the article) but in context "if it looks like an executive branch agency, then the Executive branch should have control over it" seems like a great argument and one that would probably carry in Congress, they have tended to put executive agencies under control of the executive in the past.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#47

Post by panny »

I usually agree with the EFF on things, but after reading their linked https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/05/us-copyright-offices-d... I couldn't disagree more. An LLM is a predict the next word algorithm. If the model is overfitting, it's basically copy paste. There have been several documented instances where that happened and full GPL code, including headers and attribution were copy/pasted by the "AI."

AI is essentially copy paste with more steps. The part that AI companies use to defend this is ?how are we supposed to decide how much each author deserves? They try to wave this away, but their own model can tell them. Their models work off of weights. They can determine how much each work contributed based on those weights, so it's dishonest for them to argue it isn't possible. The way the models are engineered now don't make this possible, but that's intentional and we can all recognize that. They throw up their hands and claim it's not possible because they simply don't want to pay.

The most infurating thing however is how AI companies sidestep the IP rights of authors, but then claim to own those IP rights when their own generated output leaks. Anthropic filed DMCA takedowns on the leaked claude code repos, claiming ownership over something they explicitly have stated is almost entirely AI generated as part of their marketing. They take code, mix it up just enough to scrub away the GPL or whatever license belongs on it, then try to claim ownership of the result, in spite of the Copyright Office repeatedly stating that AI generated works have no copyright protection at all.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#48

Post by vjvjvjvjghv »

dyauspitr wrote: post #20
phendrenad2 wrote: post #18

I don't really understand the hypothetical problems here. "The copyright office head would be a presidential appointee, which could make the copyright office more political". I mean, I guess? Are people worried they're going to start selectively enforcing copyright law? But they don't enforce copyright law right now...

Are you kidding? If there’s something in there they don’t like I don’t put it past this administration to break it internally and then make a case for shutting it down. This whole thing sounds very similar to the postal service situation…

They will break the system and use it for their friends. No way they are shutting it down. There is way too much money to be made in selective enforcement.

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#49

Post by anematode »

panny wrote: post #47

I usually agree with the EFF on things, but after reading their linked https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/05/us-copyright-offices-d... I couldn't disagree more. An LLM is a predict the next word algorithm. If the model is overfitting, it's basically copy paste. There have been several documented instances where that happened and full GPL code, including headers and attribution were copy/pasted by the "AI." AI is esse…

Agreed. Moreover, the authors of copyright law could never have anticipated this type and scale of abuse. Maybe the companies are legally in the right, maybe not, but that's irrelevant for the question of whether it's ethical. The EFF's post definitely goes against their mission to "ensure that technology supports freedom, justice, and innovation for all people of the world."

Re: H.R. 6028 would fundamentally change the U.S. Copyright Office

#50

Post by thereisnospork »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #44
anigbrowl wrote: post #30

Odd that the article doesn't mention parties at all, although perhaps this was in an attempt to avoid accusations of partisanship that might ensue from stating facts. Anyway, a quick look at https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6028... indicates that all 4 sponsors of the bill are Republicans. The Actions tab seems to indicated that the bill got only 12 minutes of debate before being passed,; I hop…

The article doesn't mention parties because it's irrelevant. A bad bill is bad on its merits, not because of who has brought it about.

For those of us at home who need to decide which team to root for its very much relevant when and what bills a party sponsors.
Post reply on HN