"What if there was a way for a business to transform any conduct it disliked into a felony, harnessing the power of the state to threaten anyone who acted in a way that displeased the company with a long prison sentence and six-figure fines?
Surprise! That actually exists! It's called Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the "#anticircumvention" clause, which establishes five-year sentences and $500k fines for anyone who bypasses an "effective access control" for a copyrighted work."
Let Cory (
@pluralistic) explain it. He's good at explaining #enshittification, or as the rest of us call it, the 21st goddamn century.
As an aside, there should be a branch of the Judicial tree that is staffed by people who understand technology and the implications therein. (Just sayin, as someone who had thousands of pages of material stolen "fairly" for LLM.) These courts don't understand what they're ruling on.
@MissConstrue
@pluralistic "(...)if you want to make a reaction video, then you, personally must create your own stream-ripper. You are not allowed to discuss how to do this with anyone else, and you can't share your stream-ripper with anyone else(...)" For reaction video, you can just stream the original content on a TV next to you. No stream-ripper is needed, and it is hard to imagine "access control" that could block it until we get "Black Mirror" style chips in our heads.
@zelgaav
@MissConstrue All devices that support hdcp have to block analog outputs while protected content is playing. It is part of the hdcp key licensing scheme.
The recording from our Public Domain Day virtual event is now available!
🕵️ Investigate THE CASE OF THE DISAPPEARING COPYRIGHT to learn which works just entered the public domain—and why copyright is more complicated than it looks.
Question on #copyright I intend to publish a public domain book, Myths and Legends of the Bantu. I think it's an important documentation of our cultures, but it has problematic and racist content. So my goal is to strip it of racism, fix some factual errors, etc. I can't claim authorship, original author has moral rights to that. I'll only claim editorship. But 1) Can I legally register a copyright to this edition? 2) Is this whitewashing the author of her racism?
"In early 2024, executives at artificial intelligence start-up Anthropic ramped up an ambitious project they sought to keep quiet. “Project Panama is our effort to destructively scan all the books in the world,” an internal planning document unsealed in legal filings last week said. “We don’t want it to be known that we are working on this.”
Within about a year, according to the filings, the company had spent tens of millions of dollars to acquire and slice the spines off millions of books, before scanning their pages to feed more knowledge into the AI models behind products such as its popular chatbot Claude.
Details of Project Panama, which have not been previously reported, emerged in more than 4,000 pages of documents in a copyright lawsuit brought by book authors against Anthropic, which has been valued by investors at $183 billion. The company paid $1.5 billion to settle the case in August but a district judge’s decision last week to unseal a slew of documents in the case more fully revealed Anthropic’s zealous pursuit of books.
The new documents, along with earlier filings in other copyright cases against AI companies, show the lengths to which tech firms such as Anthropic, Meta, Google and OpenAI went to obtain colossal troves of data with which to “train” their software.
The Anthropic case was part of a wave of lawsuits brought against AI companies by authors, artists, photographers and news outlets. Filings in the cases show top tech firms in a frantic, sometimes clandestine race to acquire the collected works of humanity.
Books were viewed by the companies as a crucial prize, the court records show."
Hey Washington, there's a profoundly bad law making its way through the state level.
This law, will require ALL 3d printers to send copies of the files you print directly to the government to be check against a database of "banned shapes".
Literally turning your 3d printer into spyware. And if you don't voluntarily turn your printer into a spy, you will be a class C Felon.
Implications for AI-Generated Outputs
Given this framework, it follows that purely AI-generated outputs—those created automatically by an AI system without substantial human intervention—are not eligible for copyright protection in the EU. Such outputs are considered to fall into the public domain, making them freely available for anyone to use, reproduce, or adapt without seeking permission or providing attribution. The legal and commercial implications of this are significant. For creators and companies investing in AI systems that generate music, art, or text, there is no proprietary right over the final output unless a human has contributed in a way that meets the “intellectual creation” standard.
Few artists want to allow Artificial Intelligence to 'scrape' their output to help it 'learn' seeing it as theft;
of course the Govt. is caught in a cleft stick here: who to listen to? The actual artists & creatives whose work is being stolen or the 'thieves' who run the corporations setting AI (and others technologies) on the accrued value banked by artists?
Ok. I stacked the Q.; but you can see what I'm getting at, its about economic interest(s)!
"In a watershed moment for Hollywood and generative artificial intelligence, Disney said on Thursday that it would buy a $1 billion stake in OpenAI and bring its characters to Sora, the A.I. company’s short-form video platform.
A curated selection of videos made with Sora will be available to stream on Disney+ as part of the three-year deal, giving the streaming service a foothold in a type of content that younger audiences, in particular, enjoy viewing and that has proved powerful for competitors like YouTube and TikTok. Sora users will be able to start generating videos with Disney characters like Mickey Mouse, Cinderella and Yoda early next year.
“The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence marks an important moment for our industry, and through this collaboration with OpenAI we will thoughtfully and responsibly extend the reach of our storytelling,” Robert A. Iger, the chief executive of Disney, said in a statement.
Disney is the first major Hollywood company to cross this particular Rubicon. Many actors, animators and writers have raised alarms about the possibility of A.I.-generated shows and movies replacing them en masse. So far, those fears have not come to pass, partly because companies like Disney, Universal and Warner Bros. Discovery have proceeded very slowly.
Disney and Universal, for instance, are suing Midjourney, an A.I. image generator, for allowing people to create images that “blatantly incorporate and copy” characters owned by the companies. Midjourney has rejected the claim, saying its actions fall under “fair use.”"
"As Disney has gone into business with OpenAI, the Mouse House is accusing Google of copyright infringement on a “massive scale” using AI models and services to “commercially exploit and distribute” infringing images and videos.
On Wednesday evening, attorneys for Disney sent a cease-and-desist letter to Google, demanding that Google stop the alleged infringement in its AI systems.
“Google is infringing Disney’s copyrights on a massive scale, by copying a large corpus of Disney’s copyrighted works without authorization to train and develop generative artificial intelligence (‘AI’) models and services, and by using AI models and services to commercially exploit and distribute copies of its protected works to consumers in violation of Disney’s copyrights,” reads the letter to Google’s general counsel from law firm Jenner & Block on behalf of Disney."
The Danish government is using the upcoming Christmas break to slip through a public consultation for a draft law that would make it an OFFENCE to use a #VPN to access content that would otherwise not be available in Denmark, or to circumvent the blocking of "illegal" websites. https://hoeringsportalen.dk/Hearing/Details/70858
This is done under the guise of ensuring a technologically neutral implementation of Directive 98/84 on pay-TV decoders (hint: the IP address is NOT a conditional access device).
The term ‘other technical solution’ should be understood broadly. The broad wording is intended to ensure that the proposed amendment covers any technical solution used to provide unauthorised access to media content.
[..]
For example, it will also be prohibited to use VPN connections to access media content that would otherwise not be available in Denmark, or to circumvent the blocking of illegal websites.