Comment on California’s A.B. 412: A Bill That Could Crush Startups and Cement A Big Tech AI Monopoly.
libra00@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Nah this is bullshit, and I’m shocked to see it coming from the EFF. If you can’t build your ML model without stealing other peoples’ work to do it, don’t fucking do it. The purpose of IP law is to ensure that people who create are compensated for their work, and I never thought in a million years I’d see the EFF arguing against the protection of people over business.
Zarxrax@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
AI often gets painted as people vs businesses, but that’s not necessarily what it is in many cases. The EFF is arguing for fair use, which is something that they have stood for as long as I can remember. As the article argues, the businesses creating AIs can easily abide by this law, it’s the little guys training things that would be impacted the most.
Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Let’s say someone spends a decade plus on a small niche blog. The blog has decent readership and even modicum of commercial engagement in its niche.
Should I be allowed to openly use all the data on the blog to develop an AI powered AIBlog 2000 service that enables people to quickly and easily make SEO-optimized spam blogs (it wouldn’t be marketed that was, but that’s what it is) on a variety of topics; including the topic of the niche blog mentioned above?
Am I not giving the EFF enough benefit of the doubt? Is this more of a unique scenario that ignores the benefits of EFF’s approach?
What am I missing here?
Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
The fair use doctrine allows you to do just that. The alternative would be someone being able to publish a book and then shutting anyone else out of publishing, discussing, or building on their ideas without them getting a kick-back.
Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Not a legal expert, but this use case doesn’t seem very fair. Copying the content for a journalism class or for critique makes logical sense. You don’t need know anything aboutthe details of a given legal doctrine to understand this.
This is just a tech-enabled copying device.
I strongly disagree with your analogy. Anyone can set up a blog covering the exact same niche topic; you would not have to give any kickback to anyone or ask for permission.
Am I missing something here?