| |
| ▲ | infinite_spin a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > Barrett's Traditional Fairy Tales (2021) How is a book from 2021 considered rare in this context? There's almost certainly a digital copy of it in existence prior to Anthropic purchasing a print edition. | | |
| ▲ | ACCount37 a day ago | parent [-] | | Niche text. It's not impossible that there was only ever under a thousand of them printed and released into circulation. A digital copy would exist somewhere, of course. But for us, that only matters if we can buy or download it. And for AI companies, that only matters if they can get a digital copy DRM-free and licensed permissively enough. | | |
| ▲ | sidewndr46 a day ago | parent [-] | | This argument doesn't make any sense. All manner of AI companies just ingest whatever random text they can find on the internet to train their data, including copyrighted publications. Why would DRM on a digital copy of a book matter? | | |
| ▲ | eru a day ago | parent | next [-] | | There might be special rules around DRM that go beyond normal copyright? | | |
| ▲ | jdub a day ago | parent [-] | | Ladies and gentlemen, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (which is terrible, but I would be delighted if they breached it and got thoroughly spanked) | | |
| ▲ | ACCount37 a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I would be delighted if AI companies got together and thoroughly dismantled DMCA. That atrocity of a law was a blight upon digital freedom since the day it came to exist. DRM should never have been given any legal protection - and I would push for numerous forms of DRM to be outlawed instead. | |
| ▲ | sidewndr46 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | so if I base64 encode my blog, have some Javascript that 'validates' an authorized viewer and then decodes the base64 into HTML which is added to the DOM does that constitute DRM ? | | |
| ▲ | pessimizer a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes. | |
| ▲ | goldlimetea a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] | | |
| ▲ | efreak 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | The DMCA doesn't care exactly how the authorization works, it only cares that it's needed. Quote from Wikipedia[0] of DMCA section 103: > No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
> "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 technological measure "effectively controls access to a work" if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-circumvention_laws#Circum... | | |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | streetfighter64 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Why would DRM on a digital copy of a book matter? Because DRM is just a way to make "breaking copyright" more practically cumbersome. What's easier, breaking digital DRM for each and every E-book you find, or just establishing a single pipeline for scanning physical books? | | |
| ▲ | sidewndr46 a day ago | parent [-] | | breaking DRM is so easy my generation was doing it as kids, there is no technical obstacle there. | | |
| ▲ | TeMPOraL a day ago | parent [-] | | It's a manual process. More importantly, it's also explicitly illegal. Destructive format-shifting is not. Thank copyright laws. | | |
| ▲ | eru 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | Why would it be a manual pass? There's only so many DRM schemes, and you can even use your previous generation AI to help with the breaking. > More importantly, it's also explicitly illegal. Agreed! |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | tokai a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Non of those are rare. All a available in libraries for ILL. | |
| ▲ | timmmmmmay a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | so... not rare, then? another fear mongering article lying to everyone. |
|
