Mantegna argues that copyright law is the wrong tool for governing generative AI, especially for text, because copyright was never designed to regulate systems that learn statistical structures rather than copy expressive works. Attempts to stretch copyright to cover AI training and outputs risk (1) failing to meaningfully protect authors, (2) entrenching corporate intermediaries, (3) destabilizing fair use, (4) shrinking the public domain, and (5) degrading AI quality through defensive data practices. She insists that ethical harms (consent, attribution, labor displacement) are real—but conflating “unethical” with “illegal” produces bad law and ultimately worsens outcomes for creators and society.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Asymmetric loss functions over budget -- evaluation considerations
The Core Philosophical Tension What you're describing is an asymmetric loss function over budget. The intuition is: - If the ...
-
A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how to get there. The internet protocol deals prima...
-
Pattern Description Dogfooding: Creators use their own software heavily, improving it organically. “Thin to Thick” Clients: Many succes...
-
On March 4, 2025, the New York Times shut down its .onion site which it had launched in 2017. Is tor dead? tor published metrics speak to a ...
No comments:
Post a Comment