4 ms·

Going to be hard to enforce anything against this if it’s happening across jurisdiction like this. I don’t see how copyright survives long term in this sort o

by Havoc 2y ago

Going to be hard to enforce anything against this if it’s happening across jurisdiction like this. I don’t see how copyright survives long term in this sort of context

jfoster 2y ago
Copyright isn't required once any work can be created faster than you can snap your fingers. It was originally a way to motivate creation of artistic works, since they used to involve a lot of effort.
- diggan 2y ago
  > It was originally a way to motivate creation of artistic works, since they used to involve a lot of effort. So true, then abstract expressionism appeared and suddenly copyright wasn't a thing anymore.
- neilv 2y ago
  > Copyright isn't required once any work can be created faster than you can snap your fingers. Copyright isn't required if you use a tool built upon violating copyright? Breathing isn't required if someone strangles everyone to death. (Now we can all transcend breathing, in the new post-living higher plane of existence. Which surely is viable and great, and totally won't be abused to enrich the worst people, to the detriment of everyone else.)
  - jfoster 2y ago
    That's a very valid point if courts around the world are about to rule against every AI company in hundreds or thousands of court cases. Do you believe that is going to happen?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- blibble 2y ago
  it still requires a lot of effort, but by other people not a lot of effort by the parasites
  - jfoster 2y ago
    OK, but put aside whether you like or dislike this for just a minute or two in order to think about it objectively. You are aware of the way things are trending, right? Is the trend showing any sign that it might reverse, for the rest of human civilization's time? I liked when things were simpler too, but the reality (for better or worse) seems to be that AI is not going away.
    - johneth 2y ago
      > but the reality (for better or worse) seems to be that AI is not going away. AI is in a hype cycle at the moment. Once tech companies realise that they're not going to be able to recoup the billions of dollars they've dumped into the money hole, they'll either raise prices or withdraw products (or a mixture of both). Consumers, by and large, don't like generative AI. Or at least they don't like it enough to make it pay for itself.
    - blibble 2y ago
      > I liked when things were simpler too, but the reality (for better or worse) seems to be that AI is not going away. we'll see what happens once the parasites have killed the host
- icehawk 2y ago
  It was originally created because printers needed a constant stream of new works because once they published something their competitors could immediately copy it and republish it without the initial cost of making the work. That's why its copyright and not artistright.
fny 2y ago
Punitive measures. Narrow tariffs, competitive subsidies, sanctions, divestment, export restrictions are all viable deterrents. Aside from this behavior, China has been subsidizing industries and dumping products into economic rivals for years. Never mind all the IP theft. It’s absurd the US has responded so weakly for the last 30 years.
- sofixa 2y ago
  US-based companies do the same (scraping content and training models on it, regardless of copyright or licenses or attribution). US subsidises and protects tons of industries (agriculture, chips, automobiles, aerospace). Does that mean that other countries can impose tariffs and sanctions on the US to punish this obviously anticompetitive and anti-free market behaviour? Or is it just the normal stuff we'd expect a country to do?
  - nonethewiser 2y ago
    > Does that mean that other countries can impose tariffs and sanctions on the US to punish this obviously anticompetitive and anti-free market behaviour? Of course they can. They already do.
  - capitainenemo 2y ago
    Personally it wasn't licenses or attribution that was the problem with ByteDance's scraping, it was that, unlike every other robot visiting our system they completely ignored robots.txt to the point of overloading systems. Which is why their chunk of amazon asia is currently behind a ban. I kinda feel like when people say "indiscriminate" they really mean it. There is no regard for courtesy or common sense.
    - red_admiral 2y ago
      For someone who has the resources, I can think of a lot more fun things than a ban. I think there was a story a while ago, possibly apocryphal, about someone who ran a disposable email service with a bunch of random looking domains, and they noticed bot traffic repeatedly hitting the page that shows one of their domains but not clicking through to actually activate an address. Guessing that the scraper was trying to find and block all these domains from being used to sign up for their services, the admin of the disposable email site added a function where if it detected bot traffic it would occasionally return domains like "gmail.com" in the text field.
sct202 2y ago
Bytedance has physical presences in most major markets now for ad sales/support so there are measures that can be taken and money is flowing that could be halted if needed.
lovethevoid 2y ago
You don't see how large companies with vast resources are going to protect their copyright? You really believe that ByteDance et al. are going to make their data freely and publicly available for everyone? This is a way to permanently entrench their positions while maintaining ownership. Not an eradication of copyright.

by Havoc 2y ago

Going to be hard to enforce anything against this if it’s happening across jurisdiction like this. I don’t see how copyright survives long term in this sort of context

jfoster 2y ago

Copyright isn't required once any work can be created faster than you can snap your fingers. It was originally a way to motivate creation of artistic works, since they used to involve a lot of effort.

diggan 2y ago
> It was originally a way to motivate creation of artistic works, since they used to involve a lot of effort. So true, then abstract expressionism appeared and suddenly copyright wasn't a thing anymore.
neilv 2y ago
> Copyright isn't required once any work can be created faster than you can snap your fingers. Copyright isn't required if you use a tool built upon violating copyright? Breathing isn't required if someone strangles everyone to death. (Now we can all transcend breathing, in the new post-living higher plane of existence. Which surely is viable and great, and totally won't be abused to enrich the worst people, to the detriment of everyone else.)
- jfoster 2y ago
  That's a very valid point if courts around the world are about to rule against every AI company in hundreds or thousands of court cases. Do you believe that is going to happen?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
blibble 2y ago
it still requires a lot of effort, but by other people not a lot of effort by the parasites
- jfoster 2y ago
  OK, but put aside whether you like or dislike this for just a minute or two in order to think about it objectively. You are aware of the way things are trending, right? Is the trend showing any sign that it might reverse, for the rest of human civilization's time? I liked when things were simpler too, but the reality (for better or worse) seems to be that AI is not going away.
  - johneth 2y ago
    > but the reality (for better or worse) seems to be that AI is not going away. AI is in a hype cycle at the moment. Once tech companies realise that they're not going to be able to recoup the billions of dollars they've dumped into the money hole, they'll either raise prices or withdraw products (or a mixture of both). Consumers, by and large, don't like generative AI. Or at least they don't like it enough to make it pay for itself.
  - blibble 2y ago
    > I liked when things were simpler too, but the reality (for better or worse) seems to be that AI is not going away. we'll see what happens once the parasites have killed the host
icehawk 2y ago
It was originally created because printers needed a constant stream of new works because once they published something their competitors could immediately copy it and republish it without the initial cost of making the work. That's why its copyright and not artistright.

fny 2y ago

Punitive measures. Narrow tariffs, competitive subsidies, sanctions, divestment, export restrictions are all viable deterrents. Aside from this behavior, China has been subsidizing industries and dumping products into economic rivals for years. Never mind all the IP theft. It’s absurd the US has responded so weakly for the last 30 years.

sofixa 2y ago
US-based companies do the same (scraping content and training models on it, regardless of copyright or licenses or attribution). US subsidises and protects tons of industries (agriculture, chips, automobiles, aerospace). Does that mean that other countries can impose tariffs and sanctions on the US to punish this obviously anticompetitive and anti-free market behaviour? Or is it just the normal stuff we'd expect a country to do?
- nonethewiser 2y ago
  > Does that mean that other countries can impose tariffs and sanctions on the US to punish this obviously anticompetitive and anti-free market behaviour? Of course they can. They already do.
- capitainenemo 2y ago
  Personally it wasn't licenses or attribution that was the problem with ByteDance's scraping, it was that, unlike every other robot visiting our system they completely ignored robots.txt to the point of overloading systems. Which is why their chunk of amazon asia is currently behind a ban. I kinda feel like when people say "indiscriminate" they really mean it. There is no regard for courtesy or common sense.
  - red_admiral 2y ago
    For someone who has the resources, I can think of a lot more fun things than a ban. I think there was a story a while ago, possibly apocryphal, about someone who ran a disposable email service with a bunch of random looking domains, and they noticed bot traffic repeatedly hitting the page that shows one of their domains but not clicking through to actually activate an address. Guessing that the scraper was trying to find and block all these domains from being used to sign up for their services, the admin of the disposable email site added a function where if it detected bot traffic it would occasionally return domains like "gmail.com" in the text field.

sct202 2y ago

Bytedance has physical presences in most major markets now for ad sales/support so there are measures that can be taken and money is flowing that could be halted if needed.

lovethevoid 2y ago

You don't see how large companies with vast resources are going to protect their copyright? You really believe that ByteDance et al. are going to make their data freely and publicly available for everyone? This is a way to permanently entrench their positions while maintaining ownership. Not an eradication of copyright.