Why don’t you just buy a few senators and do something about it, if you’re so upset?
Yup. Donors get policies, voters get apologies.
Donors get policies, voters get
apologiesfined.
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.
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.First, you can digitize a DVD.
Nitpick: Why would anyone do that, DVDs are already digital mediums with a filesystem. So they first have to convert to analog media first… And that introduces losses…
You just put a DVD in your drive and now you can copy files from it to you HD… If copying files is now called ‘digitizing’ we live in a strange world…
If you have a large number of DVDs, digitising them makes them easier to browse and decouples you from the physical medium (so you don’t have to bring them with you everywhere in order to watch them).
As for the conversion, maybe you’re confusing this with ripping vinyl or tape. Ripping a CD or a DVD is easy and reproducible and gives you a 1:1 digital copy of it.
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.
How do you digitize a DVD when it’s already digital?
Har har.
Different senses of the word digital. The dvd is digital as in “made discrete and not analog”.
I meant in the sense of “to move off of fixed use physical media and translate to a format more agnostic to storage medium or conducive to transfer and immediate processing”.
More succinctly: to copy something to a storage medium that’s harder to loose under the couch.
You can’t hold something in your hand if it’s digital.
Oh?
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.
remember folks: the entire problem is capitalism. it can literally all be solved by dismantling capitalism and …undismantling some guillotines.
Do you think that under State socialism that copyrights will exist and be enforced?
Who/what exactly would grant OR enforce copyrights under libertarian socialism?
Capitalism is a problem, but is not quite parallel with IP rights/protections.
Am I misunderstanding something here??? Copyright needn’t exist under socialism because under socialism artists wouldn’t be dependent on the legal fiction of “intellectual property” to make a living.
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.
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.
Deleted by moderator
I have heard in the US is illegal to bypass copy protection or encryption on DVDs which is required to digitize them.
Because it absolutely is illegal
Deleted by moderator
An encrypted unplayable copy which is far worse than having no copy. For that copy to be anything but a waste, you have to break the encryption which is specifically illegal.
Deleted by moderator
DVD players aren’t some secretive dark magic
Really? Because everyone here thought they were!
The data is encrypted and legal, or it’s been decrypted which is illegal. That is what was being discussed here. You’re trying to make a pedantic argument about it and I’m growing weary of that.
For which you need a key to unlock “your” locked copy. Breaking the lock would be illegal. Making your ISO useless.
What? That’s not true at all. You can just burn the iso to disc or use software that’s paid the license fee.
It’s stupid bullshit but perfectly possible.
What good would copy protection be if all you have to do it replicate it exactly? You’re not correct.
Are you telling me you can’t burn DVDs?
How do you think they even make DVDs? Do you think each one is unique or something?What good is copy protection if all you need to do is hook a tape recorder up to the DVD player?
The system is stupid and ultimately futile. Is it really shocking that such a system produced a weirdly easy to bypass copy protection?
It’s not an impervious technical hurdle, it’s a legal protection. You can legally do it by using software that has the license to do the decryption.
Can you tell me what point you are making? I thought I was being crystal clear but I’ll try again:
Breaking the encryption is illegal. That is circumvention of the protection system and therefore is specifically illegal. Playback is obviously “decryption” but that is the intended use, so it is quite clearly not illegal.
No one said anything you are implying was said. All that was said is this ^
What good would copy protection be…
Was not said to say that it’s impossible to break. Nothing like that was even closed to implied. It was said because you claimed all one needs to do is copy a disc and it will work. Which is hilarious because the implication would be that they developed a copy protection system that literally did: not almost nothing, but precisely nothing. Go ahead and try to clone a hollywood DVD. I tried it too back in 1999, because I just knew I understood everything. Guess what, that doesn’t work. You have to break the encryption.
It’s machine learning not copying. They are not copying and reproducing your book - except by accident lol. And they will fix the accidents soon enough. It’s meant to be not just transformative use but actually learning how to write. And clearly they are mostly successful with that goal, even if the quality of the generated text is subpar - it is generating new text by learning from your book.
So this meme is moving the goalpost of IP. If someone goes to university and learns from textbooks the university wrote, they will have to get a license to practice the skills they learn. Like some kind of rent. That is what the argument here seems to be.
