For writers and publishers who, like me, do not want to allow #Google to leech off their hard work. Here's how they say you can exclude your book from their project of systematic #copyright#theft:
Every time, you think it couldn't get any worse, a new revelation tops it off. As an author, I wonder how long it will take for the book market to be completely enshittified.
Thank you for the #giftArticle! ⬆️ @writers@bookstodon
It's for "corporations and research organizations". Does that include #universities? Not clear. The focus is not on creating and sharing useful research, but on creating "brand IP assets".
"A recent judgement on #copyright in the Court of Appeal (20 November) heralds the end of UK museums charging fees to reproduce historic artworks...For art history, this is a judgement where everyone wins."
This passed me by at the time, but has exciting implications. Presumably, among other things, we can now use pre-1954 digital newspaper images without worrying about copyright?
"Without the right to use their own content, universities are hostage to the decisions of publishers…With those rights, universities, and researchers, become the players they should be: with an active role in determining the future of research dissemination and hence promoting the dissemination of knowledge."
PS: It turns out to be a myth that Victorians covered piano legs for the sake of modesty. But one day people will hear that Floridians removed dictionaries from school libraries for the sake of modesty, or prudery, or protecting the children, and wonder whether it's a myth. The truth will be out there, but not in Florida libraries.
Apart from the #education & #censorthip issues here, & the "liberty" of a minority to dictate what everyone else can see, there's a #copyright issue. But it seems that the school hand-drew clothing on the book pages (which is lawful under #FirstSale) & did not reprint copies with altered images (which would be infringement).
I taught Communication Law and when we got to the chapter about Copyright, students often started with little understanding.
In the link, the director of the Duke Center for the Study of the Public Domain, Jennifer Jenkins, explains about works entering the public domain in 2024, inspired by the prototype version of Mickey Mouse becoming Public Domain.
ICYMI: @victoriastrauss post on SFWA comments to the US Copyright office on the matter of granting copyright to works created using artificial intelligence; as Ms Strauss notes, this applies to all writers of any genre.
But do and will AI text generators stop using old texts, let's say digitized #earlymodern print editions, when these prints still feature the contemporary copyright right advise on the title pages?
Like here: "nicht nach zu drucken" (do not to re-print!).
"By purporting to restrict an author’s abilities to #reuse their own work, “these [#publishing] agreements essentially turn faculty #authors into #readers…,” the Academic Senate chair concludes. The team that leads negotiations with scholarly #publishers…is now taking up the charge, making author #rights the next frontier in advocating for the UC research community."
The Copyright Office extended the deadline to submit comments on its notice of inquiry on copyright & artificial intelligence. Initial written comments are now due by Monday, October 30, 2023, and reply comments are now due by Wednesday, November 29, 2023.
The #Copyright Office extended the deadline to submit comments on its notice of inquiry on copyright & #ArtificialIntelligence. Initial written comments are now due by Monday, October 30, 2023, and reply comments are now due by Wednesday, November 29, 2023.
The #Copyright Office extended the deadline to submit comments on its notice of inquiry on copyright & #ArtificialIntelligence. Initial written comments are now due by Monday, October 30, 2023, and reply comments are now due by Wednesday, November 29, 2023.
In previous years, I've invited undergrads to post to Tw*tter during my class sessions, as an alternate way to participate & as a shared (public) backchannel adding extra digital materials to our conversations.
This year, for obvious reasons, that's impossible, so I'm asking them to do so via Mastodon (which none of my students have used before).
It'll be a little experiement. Let's see whether #SOCccc23 gets any use from my #copyright students.
Free, hybrid webinar on A.I. and copyright with The New Yorker's General Counsel (so presumably U.S.-based law) via New York University's School of Professional Studies.
I wonder if the whole #AI thing will finally convince artists that modern #copyright regime was never meant to protect them.
It was meant to protect the middlemen. The Amazons, the Spotifies, the Sonys, the Disneys. The film studios, the publishing houses.
Now the middlemen figured out they own basically all of art, and that they can just train a computer on that, to replace artists with a piece of software.
And then stop paying artists even the pittance they were being paid so far.
I hope this becomes a wake-up call to all #artists, to all creative people out there — a wake-up call not just about #AI and automatically generated content, but also, and more importantly, about how urgently we need solid #copyright reform.
We had been needing it for decades, in fact.
#Art is not supposed to be hoarded by Disneys or Sonys, not supposed to be locked in corporate vaults. Art is more than just means of "maximizaing shareholder value".
The enforcement of copyright law is really simple.
If you were a kid who used Napster in the early 2000s to download the latest album by The Offspring or Destiny's Child, because you couldn't afford the CD, then you need to go to court! And potentially face criminal sanctions or punitive damages to the RIAA for each song you download, because you're an evil pirate! You wouldn't steal a car! Creators must be paid!
If you created educational videos on YouTube in the 2010s, and featured a video or audio clip, then even if it's fair use, and even if it's used to make a legitimate point, you're getting demonetised. That's assuming your videos don't disappear or get shadow banned or your account isn't shut entirely. Oh, and good luck finding your way through YouTube's convoluted DMCA process! All creators are equal in deserving pay, but some are more equal than others!
And if you're a corporation with a market capitalisation of US$1.5 trillion (Google/Alphabet) or US$2.3 billion (Microsoft), then you can freely use everyone's intellectual property to train your generative AI bots. Suddenly creators don't deserve to be paid a cent.
Apparently, an individual downloading a single file is like stealing a car. But a trillion-dollar corporation stealing every car is just good business.