4 ms·

Copyrights are more often used to defend large corporations than small creators. As long everybody has a level playing field and individuals benefit from weaker

Copyrights are more often used to defend large corporations than small creators. As long everybody has a level playing field and individuals benefit from weaker copyright laws, it might actually make the world a better place. I'm not arguing for the complete elimination of copyright protections, but today's laws, in particular copyright duration, are immoral. This is as good of a starting point as any assuming OpenAI isn't the only who gets to benefit from it.

hansmayer 2y ago
...right, lets make sure we protect the little, undercapitalised startup OpenAI from the large corporations holding them back :)
austin-cheney 2y ago
> Copyrights are more often used to defend large corporations than small creators. Are there numbers to this or is it empty conjecture? The reality is that resulting civil judgments apply the same regardless of owner size, which benefits small owners disproportionately to large owners with regard to windfall versus regular revenue. That is OpenAI’s principle concern: they don’t want to get sued into bankruptcy by numerous small rights owners.
- thedevilslawyer 2y ago
  Copyright significantly powers revenue to corporations than individuals. Take music - this article show it's only 12% to individual musicians. https://www.rollingstone.com/pro/news/music-artists-make-12-percent-from-music-sales-706746/ https://www.rollingstone.com/pro/news/music-artists-make-12-...
  - rich_sasha 2y ago
    Surely copyright isn't the problem here. Without copyright, music industry could pay nothing for the music..? Just copy it with impunity. Music industry, presumably, takes a bet on many musicians, and only a few make it. The revenues made by the successful ones effectively subsidise the unsuccessful ones. Also if musicians are so widely screwed by the bad industry, why don't they create a cooperative agency that treats them well? There's enough money sloshing around in successful musicians' coffers.
codedokode 2y ago
In a billion dollar company can use pirated books for a business, should we allow them to use pirated software too? Do you think that requiring a company to pay for Windows license is "immoral"?
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  Of course, how else could we train the neural networks to run the programs? /largest_company
- thedevilslawyer 2y ago
  Ideally, software shouldn't be copyrightable, or patent-able. It's what FOSS is based on (couldn't remove copyright, so let's hack it via copyleft).
- rich_sasha 2y ago
  Well, just you try not to pay for ChatGPT...

hansmayer 2y ago

...right, lets make sure we protect the little, undercapitalised startup OpenAI from the large corporations holding them back :)

austin-cheney 2y ago

> Copyrights are more often used to defend large corporations than small creators. Are there numbers to this or is it empty conjecture? The reality is that resulting civil judgments apply the same regardless of owner size, which benefits small owners disproportionately to large owners with regard to windfall versus regular revenue. That is OpenAI’s principle concern: they don’t want to get sued into bankruptcy by numerous small rights owners.

thedevilslawyer 2y ago
Copyright significantly powers revenue to corporations than individuals. Take music - this article show it's only 12% to individual musicians. https://www.rollingstone.com/pro/news/music-artists-make-12-percent-from-music-sales-706746/ https://www.rollingstone.com/pro/news/music-artists-make-12-...
- rich_sasha 2y ago
  Surely copyright isn't the problem here. Without copyright, music industry could pay nothing for the music..? Just copy it with impunity. Music industry, presumably, takes a bet on many musicians, and only a few make it. The revenues made by the successful ones effectively subsidise the unsuccessful ones. Also if musicians are so widely screwed by the bad industry, why don't they create a cooperative agency that treats them well? There's enough money sloshing around in successful musicians' coffers.

codedokode 2y ago

In a billion dollar company can use pirated books for a business, should we allow them to use pirated software too? Do you think that requiring a company to pay for Windows license is "immoral"?

actionfromafar 2y ago
Of course, how else could we train the neural networks to run the programs? /largest_company
thedevilslawyer 2y ago
Ideally, software shouldn't be copyrightable, or patent-able. It's what FOSS is based on (couldn't remove copyright, so let's hack it via copyleft).
rich_sasha 2y ago
Well, just you try not to pay for ChatGPT...