2 ms·
Automated or not it should still be perjury, shouldn't it? I could argue it is even worse if a company their size who definitely has the legal capacity to know
by skinkestek 3y ago
Automated or not it should still be perjury, shouldn't it?
I could argue it is even worse if a company their size who definitely has the legal capacity to know about these issues have actually automated perjury.
- freedomben 3y agoI agree. In fact, this is an important thing we need to establish. If your automation violates somebody's rights with a decision, that needs to be held to the same standard as if a human did it. Failing to enforce this, while clearly pragmatic, has IMHO led us to the somewhat dystopian current-world where AIs falsely flagging people have led to accounts being suspend/revoked, small businesses ruined, etc. Whether intentional or not, Disney should be liable to this Youtube channel for damages. They should have to pay a penalty for abusing the system, and also compensate the creator for the lost revenue. Companies like Disney sure thought it was important to "make an example" of copyright violators (pirates) in the past. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and we should not stand for the double standard. IANAL, but if such is possible to win, I'd like to see this Youtube creator start a lawsuit.
- 8note 3y ago"creator" is a weird descriptor of a guy who uploaded a public domain video
- freedomben 3y agoDid you actually watch the video? He didn't just "upload" it. He made a substantive artistic change. He added voices and sound effects