5 ms·
Rent seeking by owners of AI machines is OK, but not by copyright owners?
by RandomLensman 4y ago
Rent seeking by owners of AI machines is OK, but not by copyright owners?
- Kiro 4y agoYes. Abolish all copyright. Are we hackers or not?
- manigandham 4y agoWho is “we”?
- Kiro 4y agoParticipants on a site called Hacker News.
- t433 4y agoSpoiler alert: They're not! This is really Venture Capital News, and accordingly they've appropriated the whole "hacker" image in an attempt at authenticity.
- kragen 4y agopg did originally call it 'startup news' but i don't think you have standing to accuse him of 'appropriating' the term 'hacker' until you've hacked together something of comparable significance to on lisp or viaweb
- TylerE 4y agoYou understand that completely kills OSS as a concept, right?
- krapp 4y agoFree and open source software licenses are redundant in a world where copyright and intellectual property laws don't exist, and no form of media (including software) can legally be owned by anyone.
- kmeisthax 4y agoCasual reminder that the endgame of the GPL was to make software copyright unenforceable.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- scotty79 4y agoWhy would that be? Huge amount of OSS is released under fully permissive licenses.
- jen20 4y ago“Permissive” provided the code is attributed, which the products you advocate for do not do.
- jeroenhd 4y agoPermissive licenses like "if you use this code you must also make your code available under the same license" form the basis of the world's most often used open source software. Open licenses are not the same as abolishing copyright.
- scotty79 4y agoThose are not permissive licenses. Those are copyleft licenses. As I said, a lot of software uses permissive ones. https://blog.ipleaders.in/permissive-license-copyleft-possible-distinctions/ https://blog.ipleaders.in/permissive-license-copyleft-possib...
- rpdillon 4y agoThose licenses only carry weight because of copyright.
- scotty79 4y agoI was talking about permissive licenses. They have very few conditions: https://blog.ipleaders.in/permissive-license-copyleft-possible-distinctions/ https://blog.ipleaders.in/permissive-license-copyleft-possib... Their weight is irrelevant. They would carry pretty much as much meaning in the complete absence of copyright. In the world of sensible defaults they wouldn't need to exist at all.
- rpdillon 4y agoSoftware licenses exist because copyright enables author to dictate terms. Without that, there are no software licenses. This is where the "without copyright, there is no OSS" comes from. > Their weight is irrelevant. I think we're having different conversations. The only thing I'm talking about is whether terms can be legally enforced without copyright. I'm not sure what you're getting at, but it seems to be something like "Permissive licensing is basically like public domain." I don't agree with that line of thinking because of the attribution requirement in permissive licenses, but if that's what you're getting at, I get what you mean.
- matheusmoreira 4y agoSo what? Free software was literally created in reaction to copyright protections getting extended to software. They make no sense in a world without copyright. By the way, it would also kill proprietary software as a concept. Source code leak? It's no longer a crime to use it. We'd never have to read licensing nonsense ever again.
- TylerE 4y agoIt would kill research. Why pay for R&D when a gazillion other companies will instantly clone it?
- scotty79 4y agoAnd yet the list of the most important inventions there are no inventions created by companies. All tax funded. Corporations R&D is great at one thing, making things cheaper to produce and thus more widely available. And that's wonderful. But actually we want corporations to steal that tech from each other because then the consumer benefits the most.
- TylerE 4y agoWhat about a simple basic item like Velcro? Or the printing press? Or the copier? Telegraph? Your claim is… simply utterly untrue.
- scotty79 4y agoI exaggerated a bit but none of your examples are from corporate R&D. Those inventions were mostly self funded by individual inventors who in some cases had a great trouble getting the business interested in the invention at all. Also how does velcro compare against LED, laser or microchip in terms of importance?
- matheusmoreira 4y agoYou have my respect.
- adamsmith143 4y agoI think creating art in the style of an artist is well covered by Fair Use.
- RandomLensman 4y agoEven if it were (which I am not competent to speak on), should that help to enrich some large corporation, for example?
- marginalia_nu 4y agoMake a mouse cartoon in the style of Disney and tell me how well that goes down.
- yokem55 4y agoThat's because you run into trademark laws, not copyright. Not to mention, if you can make the case that your art of the mouse is Parody, then it falls squarely under fair use.
- lxgr 4y agoPlagiarism is very much a matter of copyright, not trademark infringement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_songs_subject_to_plagiarism_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_songs_subject_to_plagi...
- matheusmoreira 4y agoHere you go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuphead https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuphead > The game's creators, brothers Chad and Jared Moldenhauer, took inspiration from the rubber hose style of the golden age of American animation and the surrealist qualities of works of Walt Disney Animation Studios, Fleischer Studios, Warner Bros. Cartoons, MGM Cartoon Studio and Walter Lantz Productions.
- marginalia_nu 4y agoThere is a conspicuous lack of mice in that cartoon.