this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2026
213 points (100.0% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

68110 readers
451 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

FUCK ADOBE!

Torrenting/P2P:

Gaming:


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

When they can argue its for “transformative use” or whatever the magic words are? Thats technically fair use in US law.

Well, considering they transformed its use to about 250GB of weights, that would qualify. That's at least thousands of times less than the size of the books they downloaded, so you can't really claim "they downloaded the books and put it into the model unaltered".

It's not like you can ask one of the models for page 156 of the second Harry Potter book, unless it's cheating and attached to a search engine to try to find the result. There is no compression technique that can take something to a thousandth of its size without an substantial loss. You can, however, ask it to summarize what happened in the second Harry Potter book, including what the actual title is, without it trying to look it up on its own.

The AI bros might have a serious point within the law, and that should scare actual artists. It should also scare studios like Disney that hold a fuck ton of “intellectual property”.

Actual artists have been fucked over by copyright since its invention. Copyright, patents, and intellectual rights were created under the false pretense that it "protects the little person", but these are lies told by the rich and powerful to keep themselves rich and powerful. Time and time again, we have seen how broken the patent system is, how it is impossible to not step on musical copyright, how Mark Twain, Sonny Bono, and Disney has extended copyrights to forever, and how the megacorporations have way more money than everybody else to defend those copyrights and patents. These people are not your friend, and their legal protections are not for you.

If the rich end up dismantling their own IP shield that has existed to enrich themselves for centuries in the name of AI progress, I'm going to call that a win.

[–] kilgore_trout@feddit.it 3 points 19 hours ago

If the rich end up dismantling their own IP shield that has existed to enrich themselves for centuries in the name of AI progress, I’m going to call that a win.

It seems to me that the direction where we are going is that it is a win for corporations, but as an individual you are still going to be prosecuted for sharing a Hollywood movie.