It seems Linus’s position is very clear now

  • TheAgeOfSuperboredom@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I think it’s more about the unequal application if those laws. People have had their lives ruined for sharing an mp3. These companies infringe on literally everything and they get rich.

    I bet the next step is that the folks vibe coding emulators and replacements for major software suites are going to get serious fines, while artists are going to continue to get ripped off in the name of “innovation”.

    • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      This is very much the problem I have. We have officially reached the point where the average artist on Deviant Art has less intellectual property rights than the average even LLC let alone megacorp like Disney.

    • inari@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      So which is it? Should people (and AI companies) be prosecuted for copyright violations or should people (and AI companies) not be prosecuted for copyright violations?

      If you want equal application of those laws, that is.

      • TheAgeOfSuperboredom@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 minutes ago

        It doesn’t matter. The law needs to pick one and be consistent.

        If you want my personal opinion, I’ve been against a lot of copyright law most of my life, but I’m beginning to rethink that with this so called AI. I think we need strong protections against commercial infringement while maintaining strong personal fair use. The details of course are complex.

      • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 minutes ago

        Either one would be better than the current situation. And let’s be real, we aren’t gonna have a say in it anway