Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jfdlsjfd" data-source="post: 9651912" data-attributes="member: 42856">Actually, copyright was designed to protect authors from having their work copied as-is and resold. IE, I do not steal a book from a bookshop to sell it (that's theft, another completely different problem), but what can the author do if I just buy one book and photocopy it and sell it? He wasn't harmed by any kind of theft... and it fell into a &quot;void&quot;, until copyright was invented, to incentivize authors to publish more. So they could get recourse from the harm of having their work copied as-is (or worse, passed of as the original).Some advocate en evolution, thinking copyright should extend to include the exclusive right for the author to allow or disallow the use of their works for AI training. Which in many place, it doesn't. They claim it's because the copyright laws predates the AI. Which may be true in some place (including, apparently, the US) and false elsewhere (several countries specifically amended their IP laws to take AI into consideration, for example the EU introduced a text and datamining exemption to copyright), some advocate for disclosing the source used, and so on.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jfdlsjfd, post: 9651912, member: 42856"] Actually, copyright was designed to protect authors from having their work copied as-is and resold. IE, I do not steal a book from a bookshop to sell it (that's theft, another completely different problem), but what can the author do if I just buy one book and photocopy it and sell it? He wasn't harmed by any kind of theft... and it fell into a "void", until copyright was invented, to incentivize authors to publish more. So they could get recourse from the harm of having their work copied as-is (or worse, passed of as the original). Some advocate en evolution, thinking copyright should extend to include the exclusive right for the author to allow or disallow the use of their works for AI training. Which in many place, it doesn't. They claim it's because the copyright laws predates the AI. Which may be true in some place (including, apparently, the US) and false elsewhere (several countries specifically amended their IP laws to take AI into consideration, for example the EU introduced a text and datamining exemption to copyright), some advocate for disclosing the source used, and so on. [/QUOTE]

Verification