Inadequate protection of copyright in the age of AI, leading to unfair competition and exploitation of creators' work

Signals over time

2 observed signals across 1 sources, tracked for 3 days. Confidence: low.

What people are saying Observed

• “The tone is angry but understandably so. The labour, creativity and innovation of millions is being stolen and then belittled by grifters shilling slop. Art, design, math, music, software, there's nothing they won't claim they can now copyright-launder and somehow magically render obsolete. But look at any of it and it's never more than the simulacrum of real work. It always looks like the real thing, particularly to the untrained eye but it's always a tissue-paper of stolen work and half-assed, half-working, sloppy output. The prompters are lazy and so are the models. These are powerful, interesting tools but the money, the hype and the grift is just intollerable, a pox on it all. If you're a professional you cannot ignore or avoid it, but you can push towards a future where the commodification of it - open models, open weights, open hardware - turns it into a low-margin overlay on real intellectual work and the hype/grift machine can move on to whatever intellectually bankrupt boondoggle they find next.”

  Hacker News · complaint

• “> different people have different values. Clearly. Ever since the government has decided people get to train AI ignoring everyone's copyright I imagine the respect for copyright has gone down the drain, as using other people's copyrights to steal their jobs was suddenly declared legal as soon as it became possible. That is so incredibly unfair there's ... there's no more pretence. If big companies can make money from people's copyright, it doesn't apply. If big companies lose money from some person's copyright, BIG sentences, off to jail! By the standards used in Nappster cases, combined with the 500.000 works Anthropic was caught using that becomes (2 months jail + $150.000 PER INFRACTION, because "wilful infringement"), Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Mark ZuckerBerg and Larry Page deserve 500.000 * 2 months = roughly 100,000 YEARS of jail (each of course) PLUS 75 billion dollars each PLUS of course starting to do these cases internationally (they certainly didn't limit themselves to downloading US books only) But of course, such things only apply to 9 year olds stealing big company copyright. This is yet another step towards the ine”

  Hacker News · frustration