3 ms·
> Instead, companies can seemingly do whatever they please whereas lawyers will send letters to your home for downloading a single episode of game of thrones.
by bko 2y ago
> Instead, companies can seemingly do whatever they please whereas lawyers will send letters to your home for downloading a single episode of game of thrones.
I don't get it. All these companies took copyrighted data when they were tiny grew to be large, they still do that now. Google and OpenAI don't send these letters. They're not the copyright holders.
I have no idea what argument you're trying to make. Corporations bad?
- ziddoap 2y ago>Google and OpenAI don't send these letters. Right. I'm not saying they do? >I have no idea what argument you're trying to make. I thought my point (not really an argument) was pretty clear, sorry. "Rules for thee, but not for me" is the point. Where "thee" is individuals and "me" is corporations. (My comment was general commentary, not specific to Meta, Google, OpenAI, LLMs, or the article) Right now "loose restrictions" seems to apply to corporations only. More people might be in favor of looser restrictions if it also applied to individuals, not just corporations. I'm not sure how else to reword my comment more than that. It wasn't really meant to be too deep, and it wasn't intended to be argumentative.
- asjir 2y agoHis argument is that it's effectively a legal moat now that protects monopoly. Like we shouldn't accept that you need to break the law to have a chance to compete with them.