491
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by eicker@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] green_goglin@thelemmy.club 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Aaron Schwartz’s prosecution was always bullshit. RIP.

[-] whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 day ago

Precedent that copyright is not legally enforceable

[-] NotEasyBeingGreen@slrpnk.net 21 points 1 day ago

Precedent that laws don't apply to billionaires.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Precendent was already there. Copyright has never been enforceable when it's transformative. Collage is legal, so was training neural nets before the copyright industry saw money in it.

Peak capitalism, steal everything from the masses, remix and regurgitate it so no one is the wiser, then sell it back to them via a subscription model.

Makes me sick.

[-] isekaihero@ani.social 13 points 1 day ago

Rules for thee, not for me.

Pirating anything isn't illegal anymore. If the government can pick and choose people and groups who don't have to pay for patent or copyright, then there are no patents or copyrights.

[-] scutiger@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

To clarify, this is the government's position, not the law. This hasn't been officially ruled on yet.

In a lawsuit that The New York Times filed against OpenAI, the Trump administration has contributed a 20-page brief in defense of the ChatGPT maker’s unlicensed use of copyrighted material to train its LLMs.

However, it's not looking promising in legal terms either.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

This just in... I think I'm going to start training my own LLM on various movies, TV shows, and music. US government said it was ok.

[-] BilSabab@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago

which technically makes piracy legal because that's the gov endorsing piracy

[-] utopiah@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

should update torrent client to say "LLM training agent" instead, legally safe /s

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago

Legal for them, not for us

[-] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Nah we might need to accept reality. You need to be rich enough to make some bullshit company that uses A.I. then you can pirate legally using that A.I. as an excuse.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 26 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

So it's eminent domain on other people's copyrighted content?

Gotta keep funneling money to those billionaires.

[-] eicker@lemmy.world 167 points 2 days ago

Trump’s government siding with OpenAI is peak MAGA economics: copyright is sacred until Silicon Valley needs millions of other people’s books, articles and art for free. Then suddenly property rights become an annoying obstacle to »winning the AI race.« Apparently America First now means AI companies first, creators somewhere near last.

[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 85 points 2 days ago

Property rights are sacred until they need land to build a data center, then is eminent domain on the name of "public good"

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 day ago

There's not just a desperation for Skynet by US government, like protecting oil from EVs/renewables, this is also about creating new oligarchs to fund electoral results that oppress Americans/humanity.

[-] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 20 points 2 days ago

To my understanding, and excuse me if I‘m wrong because I‘m not a lawyer but that‘s not what the fucking law says? You either uphold copyright law or abandon it. There is no middle way and if courts disagree with you, your stance doesn‘t really matter here.

[-] freedom@lemy.lol 11 points 1 day ago

You misunderstand. YOU can’t use the data. Heck, you can’t easily find it anymore either. They’re scanning all the books and ripping them up as we speak too.

Big companies CAN because they own YOU. Clear?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] deeprlyeh@lemmus.org 94 points 2 days ago

That is awesome, anyone can train an AI model and use copyrighted materials. So this is the end of IP laws?

[-] Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz 85 points 2 days ago

Copyright is conveniently only flexible for multibillion dollar AI firms.

If anyone ever does try to argue this in court, they'll just change the justification to "national security."

We need the most powerful AI we can make because our rival nations are building their most powerful AIs. Our rivals are using their AI to control drone swarms, perform automated intelligence-gathering, do mass automated hacking, and perform influence operations. Wars are quickly devolving into battles of drone swarms vs drone swarms, and the limit is on the people needed to control the. Our rivals are revolutionizing their supply chains with AI. They may even be performing vast automated influence operations designed to target individual citizens. In the near future, if you're an American citizen, the Chinese government will know who you are personally, have a file on you, and will be using AI to try and psychologically manipulate you. We need to be able to fight this! We simply have no choice but to keep up. National security demands it. Companies participating in national security-crucial AI development will be exempt from copyright laws.

I'm no lawyer, but a law to allow this almost certainly already exists. US law is full of national security exemptions. For example, I'm pretty sure in wartime IP laws can be waived. If you've invented some amazing new technology with military applications? If the government comes knocking and you just refuse to sell to them or demand a completely impossible price, there has to be a mechanism in IP law for those rights to simply be waived, or the rights taken by a form of eminent domain. There's probably some provision of copyright law that would allow a president to void certain copyrights in a national security emergency.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] wallwood@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 day ago

Chinese models like Kimi are already competing head-to-head with Claude Opus in term of capability. And the main reason that kimi isn't as widely used as Claude is because Chinese companies aren't burning investors money to keep subscription prices low. I wonder how long will this dominance can last. Since investor money will eventually run out. and once that happens, what plans do they have to keep competing with free open weight models that already closed the gap.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Amuro_eat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 75 points 2 days ago

Then I’ll continue to pirate everything

[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago
  • train your local AI models
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It is crazy music samples have stronger laws for commercial usage than AI.

[-] No1@aussie.zone 57 points 2 days ago

A follow up question, please:

Q: So, what is illegal for an AI firm to do?

[-] laranis@lemmy.zip 23 points 2 days ago

Nothing if it is in the interest of national security.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Vlyn@lemmy.zip 29 points 2 days ago

It depends, how big is the suitcase with the bribe?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

"Retain"? What in the actual fuck are you talking about? You surrendered that ages ago.

[-] Unquote0270@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago

Gotta keep the voters believing the US is the best at everything.

[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 day ago

So... pay for it? It's not like the money isn't there

[-] eleefece@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago
[-] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

True. Profit is about the only thing these companies will never generate, but there's still money being thrown at them, it's just being spent on bonuses, mergers, and data centers.

Scrapers could peel off 1B of that to pay for what they're taking (like the pay for antique, print only books—because they can't physically steal those) instead of just robbing the commons if they really wanted to, if they thought that anything they were doing was ethically defensible or financially sustainable. ___

[-] deaconblackhorse@lemmy.world 43 points 2 days ago

But you don't get to enjoy copyrighted materiel yourself

[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

"Rent it again if you love it so much."

[-] AceFuzzLord@lemmy.zip 17 points 2 days ago

Remember that it's always morally acceptable to break in and destroy AI data centers. The only ones harmed are not people.

[-] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 18 points 2 days ago

Firmly an example of capitalism cannibalism themselves.

It may not abolish copyright but it is causing cracks.

Copyright was always a scam, non personal information should be free. Multiple people can have the same good idea, walling of access to a good idea behind capital blocks human progress.

Before anyone says something, yes artists deserve to eat… just like everyone else. Being economically productive should not be a condition for that. Make your art for fun and enjoy the honor of being copied with a sidedish of UBI.

load more comments (13 replies)

Bro we lost global leadership in AI so what are you saying

[-] reddit_sux@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

I am pirating this book to train AI (Actual Intelligence).

[-] DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

I am okay with that. As long we are consistent with the copyright law. If OpenAI can break copyright to make their own money, it should be legal to me too.

Laws should be the same for everyone and no one should be above the law

[-] godsammitdam@lemmy.zip 23 points 2 days ago

Where's all the people shouting how awesome capitalism is, private ownership, the communists will come steal everything from you.

Here come capitalists to steal everything you own so they can make more money. Copyright, shmopyright. They've also got eminent domain on their side to build walls and data centers

[-] ramble81@lemmy.zip 27 points 2 days ago

So literally the Chinese approach to copyright and IP law.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 34 points 2 days ago

From me just looking at it, everything they're trying to do to force US AI supremacy seems to just generate and cause even more pushback. Ban cards to China? China's ramping up GPU supplying and separating from US dominated supply chains. Ban model exports? They'll make cheaper and easier models. Idk, whenever you force the market it usually backfires in ways you can't expect.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 33 points 2 days ago

The thing is, they're trying to force the market by actual force rather than slow and methodical coercion. US hegemony is over, because the buffoon in chief, who is terrible at domestic business, is also bad at foreign business. Shocking, I know.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Of course they did

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2026
491 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

87807 readers
290 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS