41
IP can’t save you from AI
(pluralistic.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2026
41 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
43619 readers
269 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
The closest example to that given in the blog post is the writer's guild strike:
In general it makes the argument that it would make much more sense for people to be fighting for labor and privacy rights related to AI instead of IP rights which will ultimately fail to prevent it from harming their livelihoods.
I might have agreed with this before 9/11. But given how unlikely it is to get the court system to enforce privacy rights and laws we do have and how much our privacy rights have been hollowed out since then I can't really say that I see that being successful. Especially not with the current administration.
This may work in other parts of the world, but in the US I don't see it.
Better to push for something difficult that could actually help workers than something some corporate factions are ok with precisely because they know it won't.
If that's the case we should also fix copyright law, trademark law, etc. Because when you get right down to it, the reason things are as bad as they are is because we have let those laws (initially meant to protect against corporate/capitalism over reach like this) be turned against us and mangled by corps.
The article makes this argument much better than I can summarize, so I really recommend reading it, but the idea is that the promise of intellectual property rights as a protection for creative workers is fundamentally flawed and is not fit for that purpose even if it seems to be on the surface, rather than being an otherwise good idea that has been corrupted by corporate influence.
I'll have a look.