EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype • Hacker News Board

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#21

Post by swed420 » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

kelvinjps10 wrote: post #13

anonyfox wrote: post #7

Independend of AI I am fully supporting the idea to abolish copyright in general, full stop. Allowing cheap duplication and tweaking is what leads to fast innovation and culture changes. Explicit (costly) patents can remain in place to secure industrial-grade research processes, but the general everyday stuff, incluing music and literature and code and so on is something to strip default rights away to allow faster p…

if copyrigth is abolished. amazon would publish every single boon without giving a cent to writers. it would be reqlly hard for writers to make a living. Im not a fan of copyrigth and how is being used at the moment but I don't really see an alternative where writers still get paid.

> if copyrigth is abolished. amazon would publish every single boon without giving a cent to writers. it would be reqlly hard for writers to make a living.

How about a unified social platform that allows people to donate to the authors/artists/creators/projects of their choosing? It could allow feedback similar to goodreads, and also be more longterm focused than the traditional kickstarter, etc. The social aspect would give people a pat on the back for sending money somewhere.

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#22

Post by criddell » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

kelvinjps10 wrote: post #13

anonyfox wrote: post #7

Independend of AI I am fully supporting the idea to abolish copyright in general, full stop. Allowing cheap duplication and tweaking is what leads to fast innovation and culture changes. Explicit (costly) patents can remain in place to secure industrial-grade research processes, but the general everyday stuff, incluing music and literature and code and so on is something to strip default rights away to allow faster p…

if copyrigth is abolished. amazon would publish every single boon without giving a cent to writers. it would be reqlly hard for writers to make a living. Im not a fan of copyrigth and how is being used at the moment but I don't really see an alternative where writers still get paid.

Maybe the strategy is to try to build up some steam behind the abolish copyright movement to move the Overton window a bit.

If IP owners see actual support behind abolishing copyright, maybe rolling back to min(30, life of author) years of protection would seem like a more reasonable compromise.

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#23

Post by andsoitis » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #14

andsoitis wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fast innovation and culture changes Does this mean you think innovation and change in our culture is too slow? What’s you’re yardstick?

Hmm. Looking at the cinemas, almost all the top movies are prequels or sequels, milking the same topic for the tenth time. I'd say that at least the movie industry is somehow stuck in a rut.

Wouldn’t removing copyright just lead to more “milking the same topic”?

I don’t see how it would lead to a higher volume of original ideas.

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#24

Post by Ekaros » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

I consider current length of copyright to be extremely too long.

On other hand I also think that creators should be compensated when their creations are used to train AI models and this compensation should be substantial per company. And to any fallacious person telling about humans also "learning". Well humans brains are not replicated en masse just yet. And single learned person is not made to millions of copies and made to answer inane queries day and night...

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#25

Post by cestith » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #14

andsoitis wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fast innovation and culture changes Does this mean you think innovation and change in our culture is too slow? What’s you’re yardstick?

Hmm. Looking at the cinemas, almost all the top movies are prequels or sequels, milking the same topic for the tenth time. I'd say that at least the movie industry is somehow stuck in a rut.

If you get rid of copyright, half of movies will be sequels to other people's work from the previous year.

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#26

Post by Aurornis » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

anonyfox wrote: post #7

Independend of AI I am fully supporting the idea to abolish copyright in general, full stop. Allowing cheap duplication and tweaking is what leads to fast innovation and culture changes. Explicit (costly) patents can remain in place to secure industrial-grade research processes, but the general everyday stuff, incluing music and literature and code and so on is something to strip default rights away to allow faster p…

> and oh the poor artists: next to none percentage wise gets much royalties anymore, streaming income is close to zero usually even if popular

Your argument is that artists aren’t paid enough, so we should go ahead and take it all the way to zero by law?

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#27

Post by derektank » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

noja wrote: post #9

anonyfox wrote: post #7

Independend of AI I am fully supporting the idea to abolish copyright in general, full stop. Allowing cheap duplication and tweaking is what leads to fast innovation and culture changes. Explicit (costly) patents can remain in place to secure industrial-grade research processes, but the general everyday stuff, incluing music and literature and code and so on is something to strip default rights away to allow faster p…

> Explicit (costly) patents can remain in place to secure industrial-grade research processes I keep reading about big companies i) developing very similar drugs that are different enough to avoid patents, ii) using their size to prevent litigation. So would keeping patents help?

That is a thing (though arguably there is still value in the reformulations). A good current example would be orally administered wegovy, which received an additional patent on top of semaglutide for combining the drug with an absorption enhancer. This is a genuine advancement, and did require clinical trials (not all patentable improvements do) but it is ultimately just a variation on an existing drug.

That being said, the patent on semaglutide still expires at the same time and biosimilars (or generics in other cases) can be produced at that time using the injectable formulation (or a new alternative). This seems reasonable to me

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#28

Post by 123aGa » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

The EFF is in the pocket of Big-AI, and this isn't the first time.

"It is not the place of courts to say these people are not artists or that AI cannot augment human creativity in a positive way."

Yes it is. If you had ever created anything, which you have not, you would know! You are a couple of tech bureaucrats who want foundation salaries and change with the political winds.

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#29

Post by simonuv » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

kelvinjps10 wrote: post #13

anonyfox wrote: post #7

Independend of AI I am fully supporting the idea to abolish copyright in general, full stop. Allowing cheap duplication and tweaking is what leads to fast innovation and culture changes. Explicit (costly) patents can remain in place to secure industrial-grade research processes, but the general everyday stuff, incluing music and literature and code and so on is something to strip default rights away to allow faster p…

if copyrigth is abolished. amazon would publish every single boon without giving a cent to writers. it would be reqlly hard for writers to make a living. Im not a fan of copyrigth and how is being used at the moment but I don't really see an alternative where writers still get paid.

[dead]

Re: EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype

#30

Post by cestith » Tue, Sep 01, 2026, 1:42 PM UTC

zer00eyz wrote: post #18

anonyfox wrote: post #7

Independend of AI I am fully supporting the idea to abolish copyright in general, full stop. Allowing cheap duplication and tweaking is what leads to fast innovation and culture changes. Explicit (costly) patents can remain in place to secure industrial-grade research processes, but the general everyday stuff, incluing music and literature and code and so on is something to strip default rights away to allow faster p…

Go back to the old 28 year system. Dump the renewal. This would align it with the patent system. > what leads to fast innovation Content becomes cultural artifacts - the whole birthday song copyright issue should have told Americans how broken the system was.

I'd say shorter but with renewals. Say, 15 years with two or three renewals of equal length, but require that the original protected work is still for sale to get the renewal. This would clear up things like retro games being stuck in limbo or small press books being impossible to buy. It would still allow rights holders to make their exclusive money if they are actually making money on the original. It wouldn't allow a Disney, where they extend the copyright on a century-old work without selling it just so they can make money on sequels or moving back and forth among animation, stage, TV series, and live action movies.