The GPL relies on copyright law to keep software free.
Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk would like to ‘delete all IP law’ | TechCrunch
Submitted 6 days ago by zaxvenz@lemm.ee to technology@lemmy.world
https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/13/jack-dorsey-and-elon-musk-would-like-to-delete-all-ip-law/
Comments
Naich@lemmings.world 5 days ago
bss03@infosec.pub 5 days ago
Yeah, we’d have to shift tactics. But, without IP law protections, the hacker community would double down on reverse engineering and binary patching. Debian etc. would still be available, but you’d also see spins on Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, and Google software based on decompiling, patching, and rebuilding, or just game genie / PC game cracks binary patching based on offset and signature.
The DMCA would dissolve and encysted data and the expected to be decrypted on the fly (“streaming only”) would just be published fully decrypted.
It would be a revolutionary shift, but I’m not convinced it would be worse.
What would be worse is keeping IP law, but only having it enforced by million dollar yearly budget teams of lawyers and not protecting creators of having their works fed to AI and regurgitated as slop.
dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
Making source available suddenly makes it free of copyright
Naich@lemmings.world 5 days ago
No it doesn’t. The GPL provides a license to copy it as long as certain conditions are met. Availability has nothing to do with it.
HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org 6 days ago
Hey, the broken clock’s right!
IP law always had a built-in scale pronlem. Without a registration-required copyright model, and probably some sort of mandatory licensing rate system, the sheer logistics of finding and arranging rights made a lot of business models inpractical. (For example, why aren’t modern bookstores just print-on-demand kiosks, or streaming services have All The Content? In large part because it would cost thousands to track down owners and negotiate terms for $1.87 in royalties multiplied by every item in the catalog.)
This was ignorable for a long time, or even a commercial advantage for firms with access to large, pre-negotiated catalogs. The AI boom created a surprise market of non-incumbents who need to get access to a lot of IP in a streamlined manner.
If we open the door for bulk IP clearance to grant the AI bubble a stro ger legal footing, it can also allow other, potentially more interesting business ideas to slip through.
Unmapped@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
Unexpected good elon take. Patents and copyright laws have probably held us back at least 50 years worth in advancements.
verdigris@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
Except what he actually wants is for AI companies to be free to slurp whatever they want, but for average joes to still have the book thrown at them for pirating the Adobe suite.
gedaliyah@lemmy.world 6 days ago
I’d be in favor of a phase out of IP law. It would probably require a LOT more public investment in the arts and sciences. But public funding would lead to public ownership, so society would benefit on the whole.
No one would be getting rich off of creative works, but we would want to be sure that people will still make a living.
Or UBI would work even better.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 days ago
I’m pretty much on board with getting rid of software patents as they are absolutely ridiculous, but I don’t think we should necessarily get rid of the rest, but they do require reform.
LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Musk saying something doesn’t reflect on the idea itself. For many thousands of years people freely imitated whatever they saw that worked, in a process known as “the spread of civilization”. At some point somebody figured out they could get rich by selling copies of other people’s work and paying them a pittence, aka “royalty”, and boom IP laws were born, and so was the concept that imitation = “stealing”. So now if you rub two sticks together without paying somebody it means you’re evil. Unless they’re evil - in that case you’re fighting for social justice. It all makes so much sense.
sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 6 days ago
Gullible@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
Saying something and putting it into action are entirely different. If he does it, I will personally build a statue of musk.
MehBlah@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Someone come up with a trump disloyalty pin. I will wear one. How about his profile in baby shit brown behind bars with the caption “Working on it felon 47”.
ColdWater@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
Good luck bozo
vane@lemmy.world 5 days ago
I see someone read “Chokepoint Capitalism” 3 years later.
FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 5 days ago
If we lived in a just world these bastards would be sued into bankruptcy.
ScrambledEggs@lazysoci.al 6 days ago
The only reason musk would want this is to put his name officially on ideas he bought. Presumably on patents and whatnot.
Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 5 days ago
I agree fully
x00z@lemmy.world 5 days ago
I’ll make Teslas, but good ones, and I’m not a Nazi.
noxypaws@pawb.social 5 days ago
IsaamoonKHGDT_6143@lemmy.zip 6 days ago
It’s more complicated, because that conflicts with international treaties.
jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 6 days ago
If those two shitheads said we should drink more water I’d check with other sources first.
Fuck them. I hope they both die for what they’ve done
phoenixz@lemmy.ca 6 days ago
W00T I fully agree. It’s one of those weird moments that I actually agree with scammer Elmo. I’m sure I’m agreeing for different reasons than he’s saying it, but here we are.
NostraDavid@programming.dev 4 days ago
Disney vs Musk when?
Geobloke@lemm.ee 4 days ago
Disney would smoke Musk
HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 days ago
I was hoping Ken Penders would follow through on his threat to sue Paramount over Locke and Enerjak technically showing up in the Sonic 2 movie. (Characters who aren’t named, but have the same role as Locke and Enerjak show up… Wouldn’t matter if they were straight up wearing name tags saying “My name is Locke/My name is Enerjak”, the idea that Ken actually won his lawsuits is debunked fiction.)
Seriously, I wanted to see a judge explain to him that no he doesn’t own Knuckles or any Sonic character for that matter. And part of that is that “Settling out of court and being tossed some “Fuck off” money” and “Winning the lawsuit and naming your own terms to be obeyed and altered at your leisure” are two entirely different concepts… With the latter not really a thing outside of deluded day dreams.