4 ms·

Copyright the content and sue those who use it for AI training. I believe there is a lot of low hanging fruit for lawyers here. I would be surprised if they wer

Copyright the content and sue those who use it for AI training. I believe there is a lot of low hanging fruit for lawyers here. I would be surprised if they weren't preparing to hit Open AI and alikes. Very badly. Google get away with deep linking issues as publishers after all had some interest in being linked from the search engine, here publishers see zero value.

ziddoap 2y ago
>Copyright the content and sue those who use it for AI training. This costs money, time, and ongoing commitment. FOSS isn't typically known for being overflowing with cash.
- cudgy 2y ago
  Good thing law firms are overflowing with the desire to make large amounts of cash from contingency based cases.
  - ziddoap 2y ago
    Even if the lawyer services are provided pro-bono, it is still a large time commitment and added stress for the non-lawyer people involved for cases that aren't guaranteed to win.
  - adestefan 2y ago
    It's unclear if you'd win this case right now.
- sinuhe69 2y ago
  The FOSS community can transfer their copyrights to an organisation in order to take legal action against AI operators.
  - ziddoap 2y ago
    Which organizations are willing to take on that burden (time, expenses, stress, etc.) for free, with no guarantee that they will win? There is not really any incentive or reward for 3rd-party organizations to step in and do this.
    - pjc50 2y ago
      That's what GNU was originally for, and why they requested copyright assignment from contributors to their projects.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
  - sinuhe69 2y ago
    I guess my post was downvoted by AI bots?! :D Because reckless and greedy AI operators not only endanger FOSS projects, they threaten to collapse the free accessible internet as a whole as well. Sooner or later, we will need to fight for our freedom, our rights as individual human against rogue AI and the übermacht of the mega-corporations, just as we need to fight against the concentration of contents behind corporate gates today. And I don’t any other way than going juridical against these operators. They give a sh*t about the little humans, not even copyrights and other legal regulations.
pjc50 2y ago
It is copyrighted. There's ongoing lawsuits about whether AI training counts as copyright infringement; e.g. Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence https://www.debevoise.com/insights/publications/2025/02/an-early-win-for-copyright-owners-in-ai-cases-as https://www.debevoise.com/insights/publications/2025/02/an-e... However, they could just do an end run round this. In the UK they're planning to get the government to help them just grab everything for free: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/copyright-and-artificial-intelligence/copyright-and-artificial-intelligence https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/copyright-and-ar...
- macinjosh 2y ago
  Whatever happened to terms of use and EULAs? These big companies use them against individuals all the times, why can't small sites state in their Terms of Use or put up a EULA that states no crawling/copying is allowed. Shouldn't that open up avenues to sue?
  - pjc50 2y ago
    > These big companies use them against individuals all the times There's your answer. Lawfare works in favor of the party with deeper pockets.
ognarb 2y ago
INAL at some point, I was wondering if it wouldn't be easier to sue these companies for DDoS-ing than copyright violations.

ziddoap 2y ago

>Copyright the content and sue those who use it for AI training. This costs money, time, and ongoing commitment. FOSS isn't typically known for being overflowing with cash.

cudgy 2y ago
Good thing law firms are overflowing with the desire to make large amounts of cash from contingency based cases.
- ziddoap 2y ago
  Even if the lawyer services are provided pro-bono, it is still a large time commitment and added stress for the non-lawyer people involved for cases that aren't guaranteed to win.
- adestefan 2y ago
  It's unclear if you'd win this case right now.
sinuhe69 2y ago
The FOSS community can transfer their copyrights to an organisation in order to take legal action against AI operators.
- ziddoap 2y ago
  Which organizations are willing to take on that burden (time, expenses, stress, etc.) for free, with no guarantee that they will win? There is not really any incentive or reward for 3rd-party organizations to step in and do this.
  - pjc50 2y ago
    That's what GNU was originally for, and why they requested copyright assignment from contributors to their projects.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- sinuhe69 2y ago
  I guess my post was downvoted by AI bots?! :D Because reckless and greedy AI operators not only endanger FOSS projects, they threaten to collapse the free accessible internet as a whole as well. Sooner or later, we will need to fight for our freedom, our rights as individual human against rogue AI and the übermacht of the mega-corporations, just as we need to fight against the concentration of contents behind corporate gates today. And I don’t any other way than going juridical against these operators. They give a sh*t about the little humans, not even copyrights and other legal regulations.

pjc50 2y ago

It is copyrighted. There's ongoing lawsuits about whether AI training counts as copyright infringement; e.g. Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence https://www.debevoise.com/insights/publications/2025/02/an-early-win-for-copyright-owners-in-ai-cases-as https://www.debevoise.com/insights/publications/2025/02/an-e... However, they could just do an end run round this. In the UK they're planning to get the government to help them just grab everything for free: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/copyright-and-artificial-intelligence/copyright-and-artificial-intelligence https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/copyright-and-ar...

macinjosh 2y ago
Whatever happened to terms of use and EULAs? These big companies use them against individuals all the times, why can't small sites state in their Terms of Use or put up a EULA that states no crawling/copying is allowed. Shouldn't that open up avenues to sue?
- pjc50 2y ago
  > These big companies use them against individuals all the times There's your answer. Lawfare works in favor of the party with deeper pockets.

ognarb 2y ago

INAL at some point, I was wondering if it wouldn't be easier to sue these companies for DDoS-ing than copyright violations.