Hildegarde

Surprised yuengling isn’t the favorite PA beer.

ooooooopppppps someday I will learn to read

deleted by creator

I am illiterate ignore me.

>Senk received a DMCA notice from Cloudflare’s trust and safety team, which was then hosting the parody site.

Cloudflare sent themselves a DMCA takedown notice, instead of just taking down the content from their own web hosting for violating their policies. Weird.

Companies are run by people. The human employees create copyrighted works that become the property of their employer by the terms of their contract. That’s how work for hire contracts work…

You would know this if you have ever worked in any creative field.

Because fair use is an affirmative defense to copyright infringement. To use a fair use defense you have to admit your work is infringing, but argue that the infringement is justifiable.

Trying to defend the AI with fair use requires you to admit the AI itself is infringing, but justifiable, and by the doctrine of fair use, it is almost certainly not.

Only humans can hold copyrights. Your example would be a non-infringing work because it lacks direct copying. An AI doing the same would make an uncopyrightable work, with the AI itself being infinging if you tried the fair use defense.

Fair use is a legal doctrine relating to derivitave works based on copyrighted works. An AI model’s fair use determination would be judged by the same standards and all derivative works.

It doesn’t matter how they used the copyrighted works. This factor is about scale not intent.

There are four factors, and no single factor is determinative. But admitting their model uses as much training as possible makes their model less likely to be fair use.

One of the four fair use factors is the portion of the copyrighted work that was taken. For a finding of fair use under this factor, the infringing work must only take the amount of copyrighted material needed for the infringing work’s purpose.

If they ripped every single file they have access to, there’s no way to be found as fair use under this factor. If they argue they were using a curated list of only the works they needed to develop their model it could be fair use, but admitting to taking every possible work in their entirety is a surefire way to fail a fair use defense.

whether a game is “dead” or not only really matters for online games with matchmaking. If a game requires a large playerbase to function, like an MMO or a matchmaking based competitive game, the game can die. This doesn’t apply to single player or small scale coop games.

Anyone will get the full single player game experience even if they are the only one playing. If the game has multiplayer, like coop or vs play where the expectation is that you will find the person who you will play with, the game cannot die.

Calling palworld a dead game is just as nonsensical as calling starfield dead because of a lower playercount. It literally doesn’t matter for this kind of game.

Russia now has a social credit system just like china and also the united states

But symphony 45 really was written to resolve a labor dispute. That is true.

According to boeing’s website the last 737 order was in February from “unidentified customer(s).” Hmmmmmmmm

Several years is an understatement. At current rates of production it will take at least 14 years to fulfill all orders.

Those are orders for the 737. Not parts, newly constructed aircraft. Airbus’s similary sized A320 has a backlog of 7197 according to wikipedia.

Its a 15 gallon tank, and testing methodology that doesn’t reflect reality.

The 2024 prius would get 750 miles according to the EPA’s estimates if it had the same sized tank.

EA already did this. Many games had real ads on billboards in the world. Need for speed underground 2 was sponsored by cingular wireless. Your ingame pager was product placement and the company’s logo was on screen whenever you were doing free roam.

This is very EA with historical precident.

A copyright holder has the right to control who has the right to create derivative works based on their copyright. If you want to take someone’s copyright and use it to create something else, you need permission from the copyright holder.

The one major exception is Fair Use. It is unlikely that AI training is a fair use. However this point has not been adjudicated in a court as far as I am aware.