Ad-hoc appeals, not principled application of how things actually work. Visiting a video hosting site anonymously, and being sent a video, is not “piracy.” Even training on Disney DVDs is transformative and so falls under fair use. No significant portion of a vast original corpus is recreated verbatim - in this case, ideally none of the corpus appears. The goal is to produce nothing like these videos.
Or if this is for classifiers instead of generators, nothing appears, because Meta’s not publishing anything. They’re looking at porn to make a program that goes ‘yep, that’s porn,’ to remove any hosted porn.
So it’s not a competing work, it doesn’t substantially reproduce the original work, it’s not even the same medium, and if anything it’s protecting the commercial value of the original work.
When you buy a video tape you also agree to a license that says you can’t use it in your video rental store. Most things licensed today will describe permissible use and prohibit other uses. No matter how much AI jargon is thrown at the issue, this is the current legal system.
Blacked.com is allowed not sell cake to that gay couple. They’re also allowed not license their porn to Meta.
Nope, first sale doctrine. Buying commercial tapes for a rental store is explicitly legal no matter what it says on the box.
Shrinkwrap and EULAs are the same damn thing and should never have been entertained as enforceable.
There is no license required because it’s fair use. Copyright is not an obstacle. Again: not verbatim, not competing, not detrimental. Doing math about video is protected for the same reason parody is protected.
When you’re appealing to conservative decisions that were just Calvinball to promote bigotry, reconsider your politics.
I’ve never used an LLM to write anything. Y’all genuinely do not know what it looks like, but you are cocksure you see it when you don’t like something, and you insist you don’t like something when you think you see it.
That is why I said “looks like”. Because I wasn’t “cocksure” of anything except you’d be quick to get aggressive and make direct accusations about my character.
Bullying is a triangular dynamic where the obvious response to abuse is treated as justification for the initial abuse. It’s dishonest performance for an audience - as if you didn’t just tell me I sound like AI, so how dare I act like that’s plainly what you wrote and meant. You’re attacking my character, but I said you’re wrong in a tiresome way, so reverse victim and offender.
Ad-hoc appeals, not principled application of how things actually work. Visiting a video hosting site anonymously, and being sent a video, is not “piracy.” Even training on Disney DVDs is transformative and so falls under fair use. No significant portion of a vast original corpus is recreated verbatim - in this case, ideally none of the corpus appears. The goal is to produce nothing like these videos.
Or if this is for classifiers instead of generators, nothing appears, because Meta’s not publishing anything. They’re looking at porn to make a program that goes ‘yep, that’s porn,’ to remove any hosted porn.
So it’s not a competing work, it doesn’t substantially reproduce the original work, it’s not even the same medium, and if anything it’s protecting the commercial value of the original work.
When you buy a video tape you also agree to a license that says you can’t use it in your video rental store. Most things licensed today will describe permissible use and prohibit other uses. No matter how much AI jargon is thrown at the issue, this is the current legal system.
Blacked.com is allowed not sell cake to that gay couple. They’re also allowed not license their porn to Meta.
Nope, first sale doctrine. Buying commercial tapes for a rental store is explicitly legal no matter what it says on the box.
Shrinkwrap and EULAs are the same damn thing and should never have been entertained as enforceable.
There is no license required because it’s fair use. Copyright is not an obstacle. Again: not verbatim, not competing, not detrimental. Doing math about video is protected for the same reason parody is protected.
When you’re appealing to conservative decisions that were just Calvinball to promote bigotry, reconsider your politics.
Your profile looks like a wild mix of human comments and AI paragraphs
I’ve never used an LLM to write anything. Y’all genuinely do not know what it looks like, but you are cocksure you see it when you don’t like something, and you insist you don’t like something when you think you see it.
That is why I said “looks like”. Because I wasn’t “cocksure” of anything except you’d be quick to get aggressive and make direct accusations about my character.
Bullying is a triangular dynamic where the obvious response to abuse is treated as justification for the initial abuse. It’s dishonest performance for an audience - as if you didn’t just tell me I sound like AI, so how dare I act like that’s plainly what you wrote and meant. You’re attacking my character, but I said you’re wrong in a tiresome way, so reverse victim and offender.
ok