zlacker

[return to "Tell HN: We should start to add “ai.txt” as we do for “robots.txt”"]
1. samwil+H5[view] [source] 2023-05-10 12:56:05
>>Jeanne+(OP)
Using robots.txt as a model for anything doesn't work. All a robots.txt is is a polite request to please follow the rules in it, there is no "legal" agreement to follow those rules, only a moral imperative.

Robots.txt has failed as a system, if it hadn't we wouldn't have captchas or Cloudflare.

In the age of AI we need to better understand where copyright applies to it, and potentially need reform of copyright to align legislation with what the public wants. We need test cases.

The thing I somewhat struggle with is that after 20-30 years of calls for shorter copyright terms, lesser restrictions on content you access publicly, and what you can do with it, we are now in the situation where the arguments are quickly leaning the other way. "We" now want stricter copyright law when it comes to AI, but at the same time shorter copyright duration...

In many ways an ai.txt would be worse than doing nothing as it's a meaningless veneer that would be ignored, but pointed to as the answer.

◧◩
2. safety+Wl[view] [source] 2023-05-10 14:11:46
>>samwil+H5
> "We" now want stricter copyright law when it comes to AI, but at the same time shorter copyright duration...

This gross generalization of other people's views on important issues is really offensive.

My view is that the Copyright Act of 1976 had it about right when they established the duration of copyright. My view is that members of Congress were handsomely rewarded by a specific corporation to carve out special exceptions to this law because they wanted larger profits. "We" didn't call the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 the "Mickey Mouse Act" for nothing. It's also no coincidence that Disney is now the largest media company in the world.

Reducing copyright term extension has everything to do with restoring competition and creativity to our economy, and reversing corruption that borders on white collar crime. It has nothing to do with AI. Don't recruit me into some bullshit argument that rewrites history and entrenches Disney's ill-gotten monopoly.

◧◩◪
3. dclowd+lB[view] [source] 2023-05-10 15:16:25
>>safety+Wl
> Reducing copyright term extension has everything to do with restoring competition and creativity to our economy

Can you explain your line of thinking here? How does the ability to use another company’s intellectual property restore creativity? It just seems like a path to allow bootlegging.

◧◩◪◨
4. safety+BN[view] [source] 2023-05-10 16:05:43
>>dclowd+lB
Glad you asked! So copyright is a limited, temporary monopoly on a work. You create a work, the law grants you the exclusive rights to that work, for a time. Because of this monopoly the vast majority of the benefit from that work accrues to you, including financially. (All pretty fair in my opinion, you did the work, you deserve the reward!)

If let's say Star Wars falls out of copyright tomorrow, economically that has two effects. One, Disney loses a ton of future revenue. Two, countless Disney other people create derivatives of Star Wars, and they make money from those. Competition is increased.

So the expiration of a copyright results in a sharing of the wealth. The wealth generating potential along with the creative potential is passed along to all members of society. Our culture becomes richer and deeper. A great example of this is all the works that build on the mythos created by HP Lovecraft, one of the last great ones created before Congress started indefinitely extending copyright. Lovecraft wrote great literature and some of the authors that built on his world are fantastic as well, I'm sure they've come up with countless ideas he never considered. But as long as Congress keeps on extending copyright, nothing we create today will ever become like that.

There is of course an important question about what is fair and how long a copyright should last. Most people these days agree that it should last for at least the author's lifetime, maybe long enough to benefit their kids and grandkids as well. But the status quo is basically permanent copyright which prevents substantial creative and economic benefits to society.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. mathqu+cr1[view] [source] 2023-05-10 18:57:59
>>safety+BN
> If let's say Star Wars falls out of copyright tomorrow, economically that has two effects. One, Disney loses a ton of future revenue. Two, countless Disney other people create derivatives of Star Wars, and they make money from those. Competition is increased.

Three, the derivatives are made and Disney starts marketing "Disney's Star Wars" which continue to be the high-demand (and high-value) versions. The situation is unchanged.

For example, you can currently buy The Little Mermaid in non-Disney form[1], but Disney's version is what most people want.

[1] - https://www.amazon.com/s?k=little+mermaid+Hans+Christian+And...

[go to top]