I don’t think individuals should have to pay - even with their private data
Agree.
[…] and that means companies shouldn’t either.
Disagree.
Whn a person pirates, they usually do it for a) themselves, b) their family or c) a close friend. Some might share on a larger basis.
And other than that, they also usually use it for a) educational or b) entertainment purposes.
For companies, it’s alsmost always d) On a larger basis and c) commercially.
As most licences and contracts differentiate the two uses, so should the law.
The fact that I can download a book online and read it (sneakily, and technically illegally) doesn’t mean that if I became an AI LLC I could download it, along with thousands of others, to then sell as my AI’s “knowledge”.
Making that an AI’s knowledge is “storing in a retrieval system” and commercial use isn’t a free use criterion.
The true problem with (common law) copyright is the fact that it can be bought and sold. Or rather, the author doesn’t own it - the publisher does. Which goes against the initial idea of the author getting dividends from their works.
The EU is not an alliance, since member states give up a good portion of their sovereignty to the bloc. It’s much closer to a “loosely bound US” than a “NATO on steroids”.
Meh. CTU means stuff comes into e.g. Rotterdam and then easily wherever it needs to go from there, and complaining about “evading sanctions” seems to me like an exercise in futility.
Agree.
Disagree.
Whn a person pirates, they usually do it for a) themselves, b) their family or c) a close friend. Some might share on a larger basis.
And other than that, they also usually use it for a) educational or b) entertainment purposes.
For companies, it’s alsmost always d) On a larger basis and c) commercially.
As most licences and contracts differentiate the two uses, so should the law.
The fact that I can download a book online and read it (sneakily, and technically illegally) doesn’t mean that if I became an AI LLC I could download it, along with thousands of others, to then sell as my AI’s “knowledge”.
Making that an AI’s knowledge is “storing in a retrieval system” and commercial use isn’t a free use criterion.
The true problem with (common law) copyright is the fact that it can be bought and sold. Or rather, the author doesn’t own it - the publisher does. Which goes against the initial idea of the author getting dividends from their works.