4 ms·

>they copied whole pages verbatim Parts of pages. Look at the screenshots. The wording is different between the pages.

saidnooneever 4mo ago
yes and besides the whole thing that is happening lets not suddenly pretend css and html are code either. There might be bad things going on but we need to maintain our standards!
ncruces 4mo ago
You might be surprised to learn that the work of a copywriter is also copyrighted.
- handoflixue 4mo ago
  That's a weird thing to say in response to someone saying "the text was rewritten, so it's not actually a copy"
  - Kwpolska 4mo ago
    On the first screen, the only "rewriting" done was s/dataroom/Room/g.
    - ncruces 4mo ago
      And the fixed version of that screen (a few tweets later), simply removes the copied text. Which goes to show there was never any original work to fallback to. "See, if I remove the detailed descriptions - and the LLM regurgitated the rest - nothing will have been copied." Some people really want to defend "build me a copy of thing because I don't like the license" to be acceptable behavior.
  - saghm 4mo ago
    The law cares about the process you took to get something, not just the final output. Stealing something and then changing some stuff to try to make it not look identical doesn't invalidate the fact that you stole it. I can't download someone's song, strip out the bass line and record my own, and then pass off the new song combining the old music with my bass recording as an original song. I don't know whether that's what happened here or claim to know exactly what the constraints of IP law for this specific instance are, but "some stuff was changed" does not necessarily seem sufficient as a defense in general. Depending on the exact type of IP law that covers this there are questions like whether the changes were substantial enough to make it an original work or whether the way that the old stuff was used constitutes fair use.
    - handoflixue 4mo ago
      Are you familiar with "Weird Al Yankovic"?
      - VibrantClarity 4mo ago
        Weird Al asks permission from every artist he parodies.
        handoflixue 4mo ago
        Because he is polite, not because he is required to. The Supreme Court has confirmed this.
        VibrantClarity 4mo ago
        That's debatable and would have to be proven in court. Weird Al's works aren't really critiques of the original songs so a parody defense would be very difficult to make. One could argue that the humor in his lyrics could have been set to another tune to the same effect, making his appropriation of copyrighted material unnecessary and therefore not fair use.
      - saghm 4mo ago
  - charcircuit 4mo ago
    You are intentionally misrepresenting my comment. I explained that it was not verbatim which refers to an exact copy.
    - handoflixue 4mo ago
      Weird that you don't mind misrepresenting that intention of mine. Or are you under the impression that you have a telepathic insight into the minds of others?
- zdragnar 4mo ago
  I thought it was a pedantic remark on the use of the word "verbatim"

yes and besides the whole thing that is happening lets not suddenly pretend css and html are code either. There might be bad things going on but we need to maintain our standards!

ncruces 4mo ago

You might be surprised to learn that the work of a copywriter is also copyrighted.

handoflixue 4mo ago
That's a weird thing to say in response to someone saying "the text was rewritten, so it's not actually a copy"
- Kwpolska 4mo ago
  On the first screen, the only "rewriting" done was s/dataroom/Room/g.
  - ncruces 4mo ago
    And the fixed version of that screen (a few tweets later), simply removes the copied text. Which goes to show there was never any original work to fallback to. "See, if I remove the detailed descriptions - and the LLM regurgitated the rest - nothing will have been copied." Some people really want to defend "build me a copy of thing because I don't like the license" to be acceptable behavior.
- saghm 4mo ago
  The law cares about the process you took to get something, not just the final output. Stealing something and then changing some stuff to try to make it not look identical doesn't invalidate the fact that you stole it. I can't download someone's song, strip out the bass line and record my own, and then pass off the new song combining the old music with my bass recording as an original song. I don't know whether that's what happened here or claim to know exactly what the constraints of IP law for this specific instance are, but "some stuff was changed" does not necessarily seem sufficient as a defense in general. Depending on the exact type of IP law that covers this there are questions like whether the changes were substantial enough to make it an original work or whether the way that the old stuff was used constitutes fair use.
  - handoflixue 4mo ago
    Are you familiar with "Weird Al Yankovic"?
    - VibrantClarity 4mo ago
      Weird Al asks permission from every artist he parodies.
      - handoflixue 4mo ago
        Because he is polite, not because he is required to. The Supreme Court has confirmed this.
        VibrantClarity 4mo ago
        That's debatable and would have to be proven in court. Weird Al's works aren't really critiques of the original songs so a parody defense would be very difficult to make. One could argue that the humor in his lyrics could have been set to another tune to the same effect, making his appropriation of copyrighted material unnecessary and therefore not fair use.
    - saghm 4mo ago
- charcircuit 4mo ago
  You are intentionally misrepresenting my comment. I explained that it was not verbatim which refers to an exact copy.
  - handoflixue 4mo ago
    Weird that you don't mind misrepresenting that intention of mine. Or are you under the impression that you have a telepathic insight into the minds of others?
zdragnar 4mo ago
I thought it was a pedantic remark on the use of the word "verbatim"