Malus – Clean Room as a Service

Post by efitz » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 11:05 PM UTC

hamdingers wrote: post #309

ff317 wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason speed limits make such a great example for these arguments is because they're a preemptive law. Technically, nobody is directly harmed by speeding. We outlaw speeding on the belief that it statistically leads to and/or is correlated with other harms. Contrast this to a law against assault or theft: in those kinds of cases, the law makes the direct harm itself illegal. Increasing the precision of enforcemen…

This unwritten distinction exists only to allow targeted enforcement in service of harassment and oppression. There is no upside (even if getting away with speeding feels good). We should strive to enforce all laws 100% of the time as that is the only fair option. If a law being enforced 100% of the time causes problems then rethink the law (i.e. raise the speed limit, or design the road slower).

Post by gassi » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 11:10 PM UTC

ryoshoe wrote: post #384

aero_code wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, according to everything I've read before, the parent post was correct and you're not. This article clearly says "art generated by artificial intelligence without human input cannot be copyrighted under U.S. law": https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-appeals-court-rejects-co...

Could the prompt used to generate the art be considered human input, or is it that a human must to make some contribution to the art for it to be copyrightable?

Post by gault8121 » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 11:14 PM UTC

kypro wrote: post #158

0x500x79 wrote: post #142

> If any of our liberated code is found to infringe on the original license, we'll provide a full refund and relocate our corporate headquarters to international waters.* I love it. Brilliant satire that foreshadows the future.

The satire is A-grade. On a quick glance, or skim read, you could be excused for believing this is real, but they drop just enough nuggets throughout that by the end there is no ambiguity. Really helps illustrates how realistic this could be.

Post by iwontberude » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 11:15 PM UTC

bananamogul wrote: post #325

iwontberude wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you argue is a non-sequitur and regardless of case law really makes no sense when the spirit of the action is to replicate something. Reasonable people would say that replicating and disseminating code with the express purpose of avoiding copyright is a violation of copyright and why it exists in the first place. Just because something is trivial enough to copy does not mean it was trivial to conceive of and cod…

"Reasonable people would say that replicating and disseminating code with the express purpose of avoiding copyright is a violation of copyright and why it exists in the first place." But then how can the FSF reimplement AT&T utilities? The FSF didn't invent grep. They wrote a new version of it from scratch under a different license.

Post by gault8121 » Thu, Mar 12, 2026, 11:15 PM UTC

arrsingh wrote: post #295

It took me a minute to recognize this as satire (thank you HN comments). However it does actually make sense - maybe this could be a way for OSS devs to get paid. What if we did build a clean room as a service but the proceeds from that didn't go to the "Malus.sh" corporation, but to the owners / maintainers of the OSS being implemented. Maybe all OSS repos should switch to AGPL or some viral license with link to pay…