Submitted 5 days ago by realitista@lemm.ee to technology@lemmy.world
https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/13/jack-dorsey-and-elon-musk-would-like-to-delete-all-ip-law/
cross-posted from: lemmit.online/post/5646027
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/technology by /u/Logical_Welder3467 on 2025-04-13 23:19:24+00:00.
The problem isn’t IP laws, it’s how they are enforced. They need to be rewritten to help the little guy, not punish them.
Yeah, billionaires don’t want to get rid of IP out of the goodness of their heart.
While on the surface I’m very tempted to say “broken clock”, it’s far more likely that their aim isn’t a gift to the commons, but to instead have the free reign to stomp out smaller players in the data harvesting space with raw monetary power through corporate espionage and hoard more data and create better AI models to replace more workers and cut costs.
I’m pretty sure the immediate goal is to make it so that real content and AI content have the same legal status. Their ultimate end game is likely to create new, more draconian IP law that will let them own the AI content. Possibly even give preference to AI created content.
I personally believe IP law should only be upheld against big corporations and not individual creators. Creating millions of profits off of someone else’s work is really unethical, but at the same time not every idea should stay restricted only to its creator.
The current state seems to be that only big corporations have IP protections.
Most of the biggest channels on YouTube and TikTok are people who steal other folks content, and this has the tacit approval of the platforms (look at how YouTube handled Sssniperwolf versus jacksfilms. She just records herself laughing at TikToks, he called her out for not crediting folks, she showed up at his house and YouTube said ‘uh uh, seems like both sides are in the wrong here’ because they make buckets of money on her stolen content.)
YouTube figured out that you can’t host full movies, because Paramount can afford the lawyers. Small time content creators though - fuck them.
Similarly, look at how Facebook’s LLM was trained on Anna’s Archive. I use Anna’s, because I’m broke, but Facebook could afford to pay for those pdf’s legitimately. (I love how they also claimed that it was okay because they didn’t seed…)
Current IP law seems to only honor the IP of corporations.
Why only big companies? If I write book one of a series that gets super popular, why on earth should you get to write book two with my characters and world, picking up from where my story left off, even if you only make 20K from it, without having to get my approval and likely enter into some kind of deal?
So I can start my own social media company called “X”? Or my own electric car company called “Tesla”? I can copy the logos too?
Hell you can download the entire goddamn car!
Fine, but then also get rid of the DMCA
If they did away with IP laws entirely there would be no copyright basis for the DMCA to exist. Company branding would be up for grabs. Anyone could do literally anything with anything.
What Dorsey and Musk actually want is the ability for the wealthy to ignore the law but still have control over their stuff.
The world would be better off without IP law, but I doubt these bozos know that includes trademark.
Fully agree with them. Literally for the first time and literally for not the same reason, because you know these assholes think only about themselves whereas I’m trying to think of what would be best for all
“Remove all IP law so I can use it on AI, but my AI is still protected” is the feeling I get from this. The Poors ideas are open to companies, but companies are still safe from The Poors
If we got rid of IP law now, without changing anything else in society, it would massively reduce the ability to earn a living from creative work, making humanity that much duller.
I agree in the long run IP law sucks, but there’s so much in our society that needs to be fixed before killing IP law could do more good than harm.
Or would it?
Disney would like to know your location.
So torrenting movies would be legal then. Great.
Please do.
That goes both ways….
Yeah but they’d still have all the lawyers, money, and private security like the Pinkertons.
Open source Tesla space x PayPal and anything else musk has his grubby mitts on and Twitter and then talk about getting rid of ip law
Lumidaub@feddit.org 5 days ago
Universal Basic Income first.
oud@reddthat.com 5 days ago
No, thank you. Provide your own basic income. Life ain’t a charity. The population isn’t your subsidizer.
RudeOnTuesdays@lemmy.world 5 days ago
UBI is a safety net for people that lose their jobs/can’t work. What are people supposed to do if no one is hiring? What are people supposed to do when companies lay off their workforce so shareholders can make more profits at the end of the year?
Besides, UBI is the bare minimum to keep a person alive. No one is buying their fifth yacht with UBI money (usually that comes from corporate welfare money).
FMT99@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Soon as corporations and “investors” provide their own wealth instead of extracting it from society.
Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 5 days ago
I think it should. It fixes a lot of issues. There’s enough wealth out there that this concept could actually work. Any thriving nation should have a universal basic income to prevent all its citizens from succumbing to poverty. What’ do you think are the cons here?
Tattorack@lemmy.world 5 days ago
The population is, just as much as you are the populations. The benefit of living in a society must be a two way street, but long gone are the days where honest work earns you an honest living.
avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 5 days ago
The population is already your subsidizer, even if you work and regardless of how much you make.
ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.zip 5 days ago
Joined 7 hours ago and only posts certified shit takes with inflammatory language. Get ratioed troll, lol
ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 5 days ago
About 163 million out of 340 million people work. The rest are subsidized.
Lifekraft@jlai.lu 5 days ago
Plenty of thing in life are achieved by people working for free in association and other things. Consumer and citizen association are working for a long time in history to makes everyone life better. Not everything can be ruled by economic insensitive. Some things dont generate money , like safety , laws , regulation , most of research and very niche technology. Some exceptionnaly rare disease wouldnt have any research advancement until some very rich kids get it , some technology for disabled , sick people wouldnt exist without being subsided.
Some book , art , tools wouldnt be created without some people being born from rich parents, because they wouldnt be able to do anything else than work otherwise. If you acknowledge that , you can understand that an universal salary would profite not only for the poorest , but also for everyone else , with more research, creation and devellopment being made by everyone and not only rich kid that got time and money.
Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 5 days ago
The population is subsidizing you. Everybody subsidizes everyone. That’s how society works.
UBI raises everyone’s standard of living, both in practice and in theory.
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
Hello Reddit!
zecg@lemmy.world 5 days ago
There’s literally not enough shit to do for everyone, some basic existance allowance is not a charity, it’s good for all of society.