3 ms·
IA could have easily coordinated with publishers beforehand and got them on board as a good publicity opportunity. Instead they did it on their own, very clearl
by orev 6y ago
IA could have easily coordinated with publishers beforehand and got them on board as a good publicity opportunity. Instead they did it on their own, very clearly violating the copyrights.
Like it or not, copyright holders can set whatever terms they want on the material they own. That includes making choices that you think are dumb or bad for business. It’s not the job of copyright to ensure companies serve the public good or even do things that keep them in business. That’s up to the market.
- clairity 6y agowe are the market, and the market is expressing its will (here and elsewhere), like it or not.
- orev 6y agoThe only decision the market is allowed to make is “do I buy this, yes or no?” It (you) doesn’t get to change the rules whenever it feels like it when you don’t feel like paying for something.
- clairity 6y agono, that’s a pedagogical model of a market. real markets are rich in information channels going every which way that also inform price, product, etc. (i.e., marketing). real markets are highly and nonlinearly dynamic.
- tehjoker 6y agoMy contention is not that the pro-business choices are not merely dumb or bad for business, but amoral and obviously threaten the well being of society during a pandemic. One could make the argument that society would be better off of their ability to set terms was dramatically pared back even in non-pandemic times.