zlacker

> "We" now want stricter copyright law when it comes to AI, but at the same time shorter copyright duration...

AI is being used to do copyright laundering, at the same time "we", the people who can't afford to run our own AI, are still subject to absurd rules that AI owners get to ignore, apparently.

>>bombol+(OP)
The barrier to running an AI model is getting lower every day, so the threshold for ignoring copyright is getting lower with it.

>>rhn_mk+v4
You are mistaken if you think companies will allow common people to ignore copyright on their IP.

The only IP that will be allowed to be stolen is that of other common people.

>>gavinh+58
You can’t steal an idea.

>>gavinh+58
I agree with you when you talk about places where companies can bully people just by threatening to sue them, and where the defender must have lots of money even if they are clearly in the right.

But AI does not change anything there. The problem of being sued into oblivion despite being right exists there even without it.

In places where defending does not cost money, this works out in favor of the individuals.

>>alphan+qd
Yes, you can. You can do that by making the monetary value of the idea zero when it used to be non-zero.

>>rhn_mk+9k
"AI" changes things by making it even harder for individuals to defend against.

Right now, we have FOSS organizations that will help you in lawsuits against companies that don't follow licenses. With "AI" in the picture, companies can launder your code with "plausible" deniability. [1]

[1]: https://matthewbutterick.com/chron/will-ai-obliterate-the-ru...

>>gavinh+9E
Stealing requires physical force, whether that be on the property or person. By your logic, independently discovering the idea is also stealing.

>>alphan+PX1
Stealing does not require physical force.

>>gavinh+G02
So again, I guess you’re stealing from me by coming up with the same idea that I had.

>>alphan+G42
You're being disingenuous.

I would be stealing if I prevented you from making money from it.

>>gavinh+Mp2
By doing what exactly? Selling spades because you also figured out how to put a stone on a stick? If you believe such things should be illegal, do we agree that you don’t follow the force is only justified in response to force principle?

>>alphan+9y2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_leader

Then once smaller competitors are out of business, raise prices.

Of course, force can go into it, such as when a big company sues a smaller company with a frivolous lawsuit that the smaller company can't afford to fight. Then the smaller company goes out of business, and the big company can use their ideas free.

>>gavinh+UE
On the other hand, you can take some (closed?) code a company wrote, feed it into AI, and launder it for your purpose. While this is not a symmetric exchange, it does reduce the power of copyright for everyone.

>>rhn_mk+783
Sure, if you can get your hands on it and if the company doesn't sue you for doing so.

>>gavinh+wY7
Check out what I wrote two posts above. If them suing you is a problem then you have trouble in your legal system regardless of copyright.