News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on An Open Source Lawyer’s View on the Copilot Class Action Lawsuit. Parent comment

Re:An Open Source Lawyer’s View on the Copilot Class Action ... by dragonwriter on Thursday November 10, 2022 @06:46AM (#33545102)
> That could, possibly one-day provide public benefits, but it doesn't have to

The text you quote is explicit: the public benefit—promotion of science and useful arts—is the purpose. Providing benefits to creators is a mechanism for acheiving that purpose, not the purpose itself. That’s what I said before, and it remains true, and you’ve just quoted the bit of the Constitution that says it while claiming it is false.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Source Lawyer’s View on the Copilot Class Action ... by 6stringmerc on Thursday November 10, 2022 @09:06PM (#33556470)
Chicken-egg it exists and is so far from written intention by coincidentally both artists and publishers to be a mutant, it’s just such a mess.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:An Open Source Lawyer’s View on the Copilot Class Action ... by IncRnd on Thursday November 10, 2022 @11:17PM (#33557264)
You are assuming that promoting the progress of science and useful arts is for the public benefit, but it can easily happen in private. That is why public benefits are not primary. That is what I pointed out to you in my earlier post, but you continue to make that same flawed assumption.
[ Parent | on HN ]