Why don't you just buy a few senators and do something about it, if you're so upset?
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2026
1200 points (98.5% liked)
Fuck AI
8115 readers
2646 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yup. Donors get policies, voters get apologies.
Donors get policies, voters get ~~apologies~~ fined.
Rich Americans have money and buy senators.
Poor Americans have guns and take fascism sitting down.
MMW the midterm results will enshrine DNC Incumbents as the fascist enablers they are.
MMW the midterm results will enshrine DNC Incumbents as the fascist enablers they are.
Can't wait for Dems to take both the House and Senate ... and then always be just one vote short of being able to do anything meaningful. As usual.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yep. The "fine OR imprisonment" part means fines for the rich, and imprisonment for the poor.
The filthy rich only go to prison for stealing from other filthy rich assholes.
“If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the lower class”
- Final Fantasy Tactics (1997)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Except it's not even fines anymore, apparently it's perfectly legal as long as you destroy the book after scanning it.
They used the duress PIN on their rare book library
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'm not pirating, I'm building an AI model
Honestly, this sounds like the best test of copyright laws.
If corporations can train models on pirated data, and corporations are persons, then you, as a person, should be able to infringe copyright to train an AI model too.
“The training process [also] implicates the right of reproduction.” – Part 3, III, B, U.S. Copyright Office Guidelines on generative AI.
I agree with the conclusion, but that rationale is wrong. First, you can digitize a DVD. Second, it's not a double standard. You can grab copies of random stuff and jam it in an AI model too.
Our laws are written such that it's making a copy outside of reasonable use that's illegal, and AI training only makes a copy incidentally to what they're doing and then it's deleted. It's the same standard that makes viewing a photo on an artists website legal.
It's not bullshit because they're breaking the law, but because we need to refine the law to make it clear training an AI model isn't a reasonable usage anymore than a public broadcast of a DVD is a reasonable use.
Trying to shoehorn it into the existing laws will just create a nightmare of loopholes and complications.
AI training only makes a copy incidentally to what they’re doing and then it’s deleted. It’s the same standard that makes viewing a photo on an artists website legal.
That's not what the U.S. Copyright office says about training. They hold that it does implicate the copyright of reproduction. Meaning: If you train on a protected work without a license you are violating copyright, and if that's not a fair use then you are breaking the law.
Training ~ viewing might be an analogy used by "AI" brands, but it is not legal reality.
I could've sworn a court case decided otherwise. Literally EVERY AI model in existence right now is commiting copyright theft on a massive scale if that's the interpretation the courts took. Which is why I have a hard time buying it. I fear it's reached the idea of normalcy in people's minds and we'll never see it illegal.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)
There may be a limitation if the DVD is copy-protected, as is usually the case. There's too much to read for a single comment in DMCA: https://www.congress.gov/105/plaws/publ304/PLAW-105publ304.pdf
But it does fall under this definition (§1201):
‘‘(a)(3) As used in this subsection—
‘‘(A) to ‘circumvent a technological measure’ means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner;
and
‘‘(a) VIOLATIONS REGARDING CIRCUMVENTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL MEASURES.—(1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
remember folks: the entire problem is capitalism. it can literally all be solved by dismantling capitalism and …undismantling some guillotines.
load more comments
(19 replies)
False, they never bought your book.
Missed a major part: the AI companies are buying rare books, scanning them and then burning them. It's not like buying a DVD which can easily be digitally copied with hardware that most people have at home, it's so mucn worse than that.
Actually, not true. You're legally allowed to make as many personal copies of anything you like in the USA, from ripping to downloading, as long as you don't sell or redistribute it outside of fair use.
I have heard in the US is illegal to bypass copy protection or encryption on DVDs which is required to digitize them.
The DMCA prevents breaking encryption but you can still create an ISO from the disk.
For which you need a key to unlock "your" locked copy. Breaking the lock would be illegal. Making your ISO useless.
load more comments
(13 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
The AI company doesn't even have to buy it.
Copyright laws are just state's monopoly on information, at this point.
Digitizing a dvd shouldn't count as copyright infringement unless you are actively distributing the video or selling it. Bullshit.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Oh no no no no you got it all wrong, you have to digitize it and then burn the CD so that nobody can ever see it unless they have access to that digital copy.
Something something who else was it that burned books?
This is why I’m just back to pirating shit.
Especially if it’s from Amazon.
But digitizing your own content isn’t illegal you have the right to backups. It’s when you choose to distribute those copies to people who did not pay for the original product that you get in trouble. This argument makes no sense.
load more comments
(2 replies)
welcome to the real world where those in power make up their own rules and tell us to abide by whatever rules they make up on the fly to keep us powerless.
A story as old as time.
Which means unlimited corrupt folk to eat.
Whether or not we can make long term change, idk.
But seeing these folk suffer sure would be nice regardless.
The law overwhelmingly favors corporate entities over people. We've been over this more times than HBO Max changed their logo.
I'm sick of twitter reposts and this format, write the damn thing yourself i trust someone on lemmy more than i trust someone on twitter
view more: next ›