Comment on Judge Rules Training AI on Authors' Books Is Legal But Pirating Them Is Not
Womble@lemmy.world 1 day agoYou think that 150,000 dollars, or roughly 180 weeks of full time pretax wages at 15$ an hour, is a reasonable fine for making a copy of one book which doe no material harm to the copyright holder?
Thistlewick@lemmynsfw.com 1 day ago
No I don’t, but we’re not talking about a single copy of one book, and it is grovellingly insidious to imply that we are.
We are talking about a company taking the work of an author, of thousands of authors, and using it as the backbone of a machine that’s goal is to make those authors obsolete.
When the people who own the slop-machine are making millions of dollars off the back of stolen works, they can very much afford to pay those authors. If you can’t afford to run your business without STEALING, then your business is a pile of flaming shit that deserves to fail.
Womble@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Except it isnt, because the judge dismissed that part of the suit, saying that people have complete right to digitise and train on works they have a legitimate copy have. So those damages are for making the unauthorised copy, per book.
And it is not STEALING as you put it, it is making an unauthorised copy, no one loses anything from a copy being made, if I steal your phone you no longer have that phone. I do find it sad how many people have drunk the capitalist IP maximalist stance and have somehow convinced themselves that advocating for Disney and the publishing cartel being allowed to dictate how people use works they have is somehow sticking up for the little guy