They are just illegally selling us off as slaves. That is what is happening. All our fault for not having strong citizen watchdogs, clamping down on this behavior.
Paul McCartney and Dua Lipa among artists urging British Prime Minister Starmer to rethink his AI copyright plans
Submitted 1 month ago by dwazou@lemm.ee to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 month ago
gradual@lemmings.world 1 month ago
All our fault for not having strong citizen watchdogs
We’re all too busy playing fortnite and watching marvel movies.
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 month ago
I’m planning food and will share. Problem is, well…
finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 month ago
How tf did this Ponze Scheme even get as far as the UK Prime Minister’s desk?
echodot@feddit.uk 1 month ago
It’s not a Ponzi scheme. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s a scam and even if it was a scam that wouldn’t be the type of scam that it was.
Absolute worst you could call it is false advertising, because AI does actually work just not very well.
finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 month ago
A company that makes negative income every quarter forever, and whose latest edition costs a magnitude more power and is worse than the previous, is worth between $150 Bn and $300 Bn. Many other competing companies equally overvalued.
These are businesses who are only valuable because people keep investing in them. A Ponzi Scheme.
SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Paul McCartney and Dua Lipa should release a song together.
GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
Don’t worry, if they don’t you can just use ai to make them.
oce@jlai.lu 1 month ago
Don’t Let Me Down, Just Don’t Start Now
rational_lib@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I’m plenty open to questioning every part of copyright (has the idea ever actually been proven to be worth the enormous costs?) but the same copyright should apply to everbody. It sounds like this proposal gives a specific pass to corporations developing AI - anything these corporations can access should be accessible to the general public as well.
Agent641@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I wonder how they decided which artist to include in the thumbnail image.
Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Moneys decided it. No one is going to click on a image for a old wrinkly white guy
gradual@lemmings.world 1 month ago
A new law could soon allow AI companies to use copyrighted material without permission.
Good. Copyright and patent laws need to die.
All the money wasted enforcing them and taken from customers could be better spent on other things.
Creators will still create, as they always have. We just won’t have millionaire scumbags like ‘paul mccartney’ living like kings while children starve.
Alteon@lemmy.world 1 month ago
This is a terrible take. Sure. There are issues with the system, but these laws protect smaller musicians and inventors from having their ideas stolen and profited upon by larger players.
Without patent laws, there’s no reason to ever “buyout” a design from an inventor, or for smaller songwriters to ever get paid again. A large company or musician could essentially steal your work and make money off of it, and you would get nothing for all of the time and effort that you put into it.
gradual@lemmings.world 1 month ago
Most musicians and inventors never make any significant amounts money off of their music or inventions.
There is an extremely small pool of creators who make an egregious amount of money off of their creations.
A large company or musician could essentially steal your work and make money off of it
They would make less money overall if they did not have copyright and patent laws to help them. It’s sad watching you people go to bat for laws that exist solely to make rich people richer, but it’s why you’re average.
mechoman444@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Lol says the guy that’s probably going to pirate GTA 6.
And how do you propose people you claim will continue to create be compensated for their work when one of those much bigger corporations you seem to hate simply steal their work and profit off of it?
gradual@lemmings.world 1 month ago
Things like rent won’t be so expensive because landlords will have less of an excuse to charge customers more money. So, in essence you’re not even arguing for compensating creators for their work; you’re arguing for compensating their feudal lords.
when one of those much bigger corporations you seem to hate simply steal their work and profit off of it?
How are corporations going to profit when there are no copyright and patent laws? Your cognitive dissonance is on full display here.
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Lol everything you create will now be stolen by Disney who will own the only organizations that can reach an audience.
Thanks for giving them free money forever just so you can spite people with actual talent.
gradual@lemmings.world 1 month ago
How is disney going to make its money without copyright and patent laws?
How will their movies sell if it’s legal for anyone to copy and redistribute them?
How will they make as much money off off merchandise if they have to legally compete with people who don’t hold copyrights to their IP?
The only “Lol” here is how proud you people are for being useful idiots. This is why things are the way they are.
thewedtdeservedit@lemmy.cafe 1 month ago
Well another two idiots that I’ll never listen to. Hey Metallica isn’t alone now
BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
It’s always the people that fear for their assets that want things to stay the same.
I find it interesting that people who were pro pirating, are now against AI companies using copyrighted materials.
Personally, I think copyright was a dumb concept and shouldn’t exist. It’s time we get rid of it.
nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
You should tell these companies then, because after pirating all the copyrighted information they will absolutely push for IP protections for AI output.
overcooked_sap@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Slight difference between little Johny torrrenting the latest movie for personal use and an AI company doing it for commercial gain.
AtariDump@lemmy.world 1 month ago
What’s a Dua Lipa?
hissingssid@lemy.lol 1 month ago
AI really shows the absurdity of intellectual property as a concept, the very way we learn, every idea we can have, every mental image we can create is the sum of copying and adapting the things we perceive. IP is ontological incoherent for this reason you cannot “own” an idea so much as you can own the water of one part of a stream
arararagi@ani.social 1 month ago
I don’t disagree with you, but AI companies shouldn’t get an exclusive free pass.
hissingssid@lemy.lol 1 month ago
Oh yes, I am not saying that at all. I am still very unsure on my views of AI from a precautionary standpoint and I think that its commercial use will lead to more harm than good but if these things are the closest analogs we have to looking at how humans learn and create it shows IP is ridiculous- I mean we do not even need them to see this, if an idea was purely and solely one person’s property the idea of someone from the sentinel island inventing the cure for brain cancer is as likely as a team of oncologists at Oxford doing it.
DimFisher@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Absurd obscenities you spew my friend, the fact that an artist take influences from any kind of art form doesn’t mean the end result is not original and it is not intellectual property as that
godownloadacar@lemmy.cafe 1 month ago
Intellectual property is intellectual theft