zlacker

[parent] [thread] 7 comments
1. sotrus+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-12-15 00:42:19
Right, so totally cool to ignore the law but our TOS is a binding contract.
replies(2): >>mc32+B >>protoc+U
2. mc32+B[view] [source] 2025-12-15 00:47:27
>>sotrus+(OP)
Yes, they can be sued for breach of contract. And it’s not a regular ToS but a signed MSA and other legally binding documents.
replies(1): >>blibbl+T1
3. protoc+U[view] [source] 2025-12-15 00:48:59
>>sotrus+(OP)
Where are they ignoring the law?
replies(2): >>yieldc+t3 >>sotrus+f5
◧◩
4. blibbl+T1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-15 00:55:45
>>mc32+B
the license on my open source code is a contract, and they ignored that

if they can get away with it (say by claiming it's "fair use"), they'll ignore corporate ones too

replies(1): >>LPisGo+UD
◧◩
5. yieldc+t3[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-15 01:09:19
>>protoc+U
people that say this tend to have a misinterpretation of copyright, and use all the court cases brought by large rights holders as validation

despite all 3 branches of the government disagreeing with them over and over again

◧◩
6. sotrus+f5[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-15 01:24:01
>>protoc+U
https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/musks-xai-opera...
replies(1): >>protoc+So
◧◩◪
7. protoc+So[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-15 04:18:25
>>sotrus+f5
Thats an allegation. Doesnt an allegation need to be tested?
◧◩◪
8. LPisGo+UD[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-15 07:21:17
>>blibbl+T1
If I were to go out on a limb, those companies spend more on tech companies than you and they have larger legal teams than you. That is a carrot and a stick for AI companies to follow the contract.
[go to top]