zlacker

>>moose4+(OP)
The HN crowd dislikes brick-and-mortar landlords but often sides with charging rent for certain bits. Which side will prevail?

Interesting excerpt:

> “We will have a trial on the pirated copies used to create Anthropic’s central library and the resulting damages,” Judge Alsup wrote in the decision. “That Anthropic later bought a copy of a book it earlier stole off the internet will not absolve it of liability for theft but it may affect the extent of statutory damages.”

Language of “pirated” and “theft” are from the article. If they did realize a mistake and purchased copies after the fact, why should that be insufficient?

>>gbacon+K2
Anthropic won't submit a spreadsheet of all the books and whether they were purchases or not. So trivially, not every book stolen is shown to be later purchased.

As just a matter of society, I don't think you want people say stealing a car and then coming back a month later with the money.

>>lesuor+O5
While no one wants anyone to steal a car, almost no one would mind freely cloning a car. The trouble truly is that 3d-printing hasn't gotten that good yet.

>>thedev+f6
The car would be unlikely to exist if its maker had to expect free clones without compensation. So yes, people would mind.

>>layer8+8f
Completely untrue. If some clever engineer or consortium of engineers designed a 3D-printable car for 3D printing-and-manufacturing companies to make then it surely would exist. If you buy one from a Ford dealership you'd be getting the Ford-branded version which may have their own tweaks to the design.

It makes perfect sense to me that the big carmakers could get together some day and develop a handful of car platforms that all their cars will be built upon. That way they can buy the parts from any number of manufacturers (on-demand!) and save themselves a ton of money.

They kind of already do that, actually =)