zlacker

If you believe that destroying books is bad, your issue is with copyright law, not the AI companies. The AI companies are just following copyright law -- they are allowed to move data from one format to another (thereby destroying the original), but not copy it.

>>Captai+(OP)
Not everything objectionable or unethical should or could necessarily be outlawed. "It's not illegal" is not really an argument or justification for anything.

>>Captai+(OP)
Specifically his issue is with First Sale doctrine. If you own it you can destroy it and its none of anyone else's business.

>>Captai+(OP)
> If you believe that destroying books is bad, your issue is with copyright law, not the AI companies

No, my issue is with the companies that do this. The law doesn't enter into it. Just because a thing is legal doesn't mean it's OK.

>>rasz+b8
I don't have an issue with the first sale doctrine. It's an important property right.

That doesn't mean I support everything that people have a right to do with their property.

>>baobun+O
I don't think CaptainFever's point is that it's acceptable because it's legal, but rather that copyright law is what prevents them from, say, donating the originals instead of throwing them away.

>>Captai+(OP)
I very much have a problem with both of these things.