|
|
|
|
|
by beeboobaa3
772 days ago
|
|
> Assume the human Humans have rights. They get to do things that businesses, and machine learning models, or general automation, don't. Just like you can sit in a library and tell people the contents of books when they ask, but if you go ahead and upload everything you get bullied into suicide by the US government[1] > Consumers and small companies get away with small copyright violations all the time Yeah, because people don't notice so they don't care. Everyone knows what these bigtech criminals are doing. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz |
|
So is that a yes to my question?
If humans are allowed to do it for commercial purposes, and it's entirely about human versus machine, then why did you say "Using copyrighted content for commercial purposes should be a violation" in the first place?
> Just like you can sit in a library and tell people the contents of books when they ask,
You know there a huge difference between describing a book and uploading the entire contents verbatim, right?
If "tell the contents" means reading the book out loud, that becomes illegal as soon as enough people are listening to make it a public performance.
> but if you go ahead and upload everything you get bullied into suicide by the US government[1]
They did that to a human... So I've totally lost track of what your point is now.