4 ms·
This is a tough one. On the one hand since this is producing something directly from the audio that you have already paid for, not allowing this seems like it
by harimau777 7y ago
This is a tough one.
On the one hand since this is producing something directly from the audio that you have already paid for, not allowing this seems like it would be another example of the whole right to repair/modify and "you don't really own it" issues.
On the other hand, I think it's reasonable to say that the AI provides capabilities that current laws didn't anticipate. I'm also sympathetic to the argument that someone else in this thread made its an example of Amazon profiting off of something that they didn't make at the expense of those who did make it.
- SkyBelow 7y ago>On the other hand, I think it's reasonable to say that the AI provides capabilities that current laws didn't anticipate. I don't see that being the case. It changes the cost, but I was always able to have someone transcribe text for me. If I paid someone to listen to audio of objects I own and produce a copy of the words within it just for my consumption, then it is legal. Even more so, I was always able to transcribe it into words myself. Be it pen and paper or be it a keyboard and hard drive, I was always able to take audio I own and transcribe it into written text for my own use. The AI provides a great reduction in difficult in doing this, but does not provide any new functionality.