3 ms·
I meant it exactly as I said it. I do not agree that any theft occurred, either in law or in spirit, and I believe that reinterpretation of intellectual-propert
by marssaxman 1y ago
I meant it exactly as I said it. I do not agree that any theft occurred, either in law or in spirit, and I believe that reinterpretation of intellectual-property law in order to make it a crime would cause significant harm, greatly outweighing the benefits, as has been the case with every other expansion of intellectual property law I have seen.
- fcarraldo 1y agoAnthropic downloaded books from Library Genesis and The Pirate Library mirror. This is factual and reported on from court documents. What’s the angle that describes this as fair use? [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/anthropic-cut-pirated-millions-used-books-train-claude-copyright-2025-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/anthropic-cut-pirated-millio...
- marssaxman 1y agoThe simple fact that they are not republishing any of that data. Fair use does not apply, because copyright does not apply, because nothing is being copied.
- Wowfunhappy 1y agoSo you don't think downloading something from The Pirate Bay constitutes copyright infringement provided you don't republish it?
- marssaxman 1y agoPrecisely. The person sharing is the one breaking the law.
- TheRoque 1y agoThat's factually wrong, downloading without sharing is also illegal.
- thrwaway55 1y agoI just want to confirm this, you believe that when OpenAI and their agents post copyright material that they did not pay for verbatim it is breaking the law?
- coldtea 1y agoYou are wrong then. Confidently wrong. U.S.: Downloading = infringement. If prosecuted, usually gets civil lawsuits/fines, not jail. E.U.: Same — both downloading/hosting illegal, but hosts get cracked down harder.