4 ms·
That's not going to hold up in court. They cannot claim a copyright to exhaustive computer generated corpus. Even if they could, it doesn't make sense. You don'
by HWR_14 5y ago
That's not going to hold up in court. They cannot claim a copyright to exhaustive computer generated corpus. Even if they could, it doesn't make sense. You don't get to ignore every books copyright just because you read a dictionary.
- addsubtract 5y agoThis isn’t reading the dictionary, it’s similar to generating new unique sentences and claiming copyright on that. Right?
- HWR_14 5y agoIt's creating 12 long sequences from 12 notes. That sounds far closer to a dictionary than anything else.
- danuker 5y ago> They cannot claim a copyright to exhaustive computer generated corpus. And why not? For example, a UK law specifically mentions "computer-generated" work: > If the work is computer-generated, copyright expires fifty years after the work is made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright,_Designs_and_Patents_Act_1988 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright,_Designs_and_Patents... Is there any law you based the word "cannot" on? Is there a limitation on the extent of such copyright claims a person can make? Even though physically one couldn't write it on paper during one's lifetime?
- HWR_14 5y agoIn the US, you cannot claim copyright on any work devoid of any creative intent. A phone book is not copyrightable, but the specific fonts and organization can make a given phone book copyrightable. Organized trivia isn't copyrightable, but the expression is. There's no expression with an extensive corpus. It also wouldn't matter. The existence of the corpus doesn't change the copyrightability of other works. You'd still have to convince a jury it was more likely you were inspired by the corpus than the hit song whose melody is identical.