News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Microsofts AI boss thinks its perfectly OK to steal content if its on open web. Parent comment

Re:Microsofts AI boss thinks its perfectly OK to steal conte... by jprete on Saturday June 29, 2024 @06:41PM (#40833768)
The Verge quotes: "I think that with respect to content that’s already on the open web, the social contract of that content since the ‘90s has been that it is fair use. Anyone can copy it, recreate with it, reproduce with it. That has been 'freeware,' if you like, that’s been the understanding."

This statement is quite wrong. People have complained about content farms and plagiarists ripping off their content for ages. The only kinds of Web content I can think of where his statement could apply are open source software (for the more permissive licenses) and Stack Overflow posts. Almost everything else was posted with the intent of copyright.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Microsofts AI boss thinks its perfectly OK to steal conte... by Forge36 on Saturday June 29, 2024 @07:20PM (#40833976)
While the intent of copyright is unknown, when it's unstated it can be changed later. The legal solution to this is licenses.

A common curiosity to unstated intent is attribution. This is missing (and not currently possible) with many AI models today.

The Internet is not detached from the rest of the world. Something with a license can appear there (with or without the holders knowledge)

Note: Not intending to contradict you but elaborate on that last point as assuming intent is dangerous.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Microsofts AI boss thinks its perfectly OK to steal conte... by yencabulator on Sunday June 30, 2024 @02:20PM (#40838909)
Open source software is posted with the intent of copyright. Copyright is what enforces the license, which is what makes it open source. For BSD/Apache2 etc the license still requires attribution.
[ Parent | on HN ]