zlacker

[return to "AI companies have all kinds of arguments against paying for copyrighted content"]
1. anothe+K9[view] [source] 2023-11-05 17:49:51
>>rntn+(OP)
You've got to love the idea that copyright doesn't apply to input code (from others), but does to their output code.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24117932-apple

◧◩
2. vasdae+oc[view] [source] 2023-11-05 18:04:55
>>anothe+K9
That's the way it's always worked. You read books to learn to code, then write code and you get paid for it, but that money doesn't trickle down to the writers of the books that taught you to code.
◧◩◪
3. freeja+Xc[view] [source] 2023-11-05 18:07:00
>>vasdae+oc
Those books you read were copyrighted.
◧◩◪◨
4. vasdae+Xd[view] [source] 2023-11-05 18:11:37
>>freeja+Xc
Despite the books being copyrighted that doesn't give the authors any rights over the code I have written.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. anothe+Be[view] [source] 2023-11-05 18:14:07
>>vasdae+Xd
It does when you produce the code verbatim, as happens frequently.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. jnovek+5h[view] [source] 2023-11-05 18:26:44
>>anothe+Be
Betcha I’ve spontaneously produced code that’s been written before. Who do I owe royalties to?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. sensan+Xi[view] [source] 2023-11-05 18:36:36
>>jnovek+5h
You're not a computer whose sole purpose is to regurgitate code verbatim at massive scale when requested, unlike an LLM designed for exactly that purpose.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. androm+w02[view] [source] 2023-11-06 10:03:44
>>sensan+Xi
Except LLMs aren't exactly optimized for verbatim regurgitation.
[go to top]