News Google Wants AI Scraping to Be 'Fair Use.' Will That Fly in Court?

[hannibal]

Google should have to live by the same fair use standards they put on their content creators. Given how ridiculous YouTube and search can be with filtering out content or complying with obviously bogus DMCA take-down requests, Google should also have to comb through their datasets to aggressively apply every complaint. It's only fair!

That is the copyright owners and Google is just giving the message. Google does not own the content in Youtube, the owner of the content make the demand. For google it would be better to have free to all, because there would be more people watching.... so more income to them.

 

[InvalidError]

That is the copyright owners and Google is just giving the message. Google does not own the content in Youtube, the owner of the content make the demand. For google it would be better to have free to all, because there would be more people watching.... so more income to them.

Maybe if YT was turning up a profit. From what I heard about most social media economics, valuation is driven by subscriber counts which was in turn used to borrow cheap capital. Once subs flatten out and capital gets more expensive, the real struggle to make an actual profit begins and lots of social media is going to fall flat on its face there, which is part of the reason why Google is desperate to have its web DRM thing made into a standard and block ad-blockers.

 

[palladin9479]

This has already been tested in courts. Sony lawyers made the argument that possessing MP3 files is equal to stealing. Consumers were arguing that a copy is not equal to stealing because it's a copy. This is the exact same argument, but this time from a Company rather than a consumer, trying to make the argument that copying data into an AI database is not stealing but merely "scraping" ie replicating the original data.

Copying works you do not own a license to is theft. The MP3 lawsuit is very different, the people already had purchased licenses to the music in the form of buying Compact Disks and were making a copy for personal use. The courts held that those who purchase a license to media have the right to make a backup copy for personal use, but not for distribution or reselling.

 

[thisisaname]

More like buying a newspaper, reading the newspaper, then telling someone else what you read in the news when they ask you.

That anyone thinks handing corporations the legal tools to say "you looked at our work before creating your work, therefore we own your work/you owe us cash" is a good idea need to take another look at the history of copyright law. Do you really believe Disney et al will pinky-swear to only use such tools against corporate AI models, and not against literally everyone they think they can make a buck from?

Disney is far more a cease and desist company.

 

[randyh121]

Google should have to live by the same fair use standards they put on their content creators. Given how ridiculous YouTube and search can be with filtering out content or complying with obviously bogus DMCA take-down requests, Google should also have to comb through their datasets to aggressively apply every complaint. It's only fair!

I never thought about it like that; you are right.