35
IP can’t save you from AI (pluralistic.net)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/technology@beehaw.org
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

By demanding the copyright our bosses love, we're seeking the right to be angry about AI, even as the AI companies and our bosses cut deals to train chatbots with our work, which they will use to attack our livelihoods.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 months ago (6 children)

Out of curiosity, what else has worked (in the court system) to even remotely challenge AI companies?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

    The closest example to that given in the blog post is the writer's guild strike:

    If we're workers, then we derive our power from labor rights. The Writers Guild – the only creative workers in world history to have comprehensively beaten AI in their workplace – won their AI fight with a strike:

    https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/01/how-the-writers-guild-sunk-ais-ship/

    The Hollywood guilds are able to pursue a limited form of "sectoral bargaining" (where all the workers in a field bargain with all its bosses) called "multi-employer bargaining." Bosses hate sectoral bargaining, and in 1947 they got it banned outright through the Taft-Hartley Act.

    In general it makes the argument that it would make much more sense for people to be fighting for labor and privacy rights related to AI instead of IP rights which will ultimately fail to prevent it from harming their livelihoods.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

    I might have agreed with this before 9/11. But given how unlikely it is to get the court system to enforce privacy rights and laws we do have and how much our privacy rights have been hollowed out since then I can't really say that I see that being successful. Especially not with the current administration.

    This may work in other parts of the world, but in the US I don't see it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    Better to push for something difficult that could actually help workers than something some corporate factions are ok with precisely because they know it won't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    If that's the case we should also fix copyright law, trademark law, etc. Because when you get right down to it, the reason things are as bad as they are is because we have let those laws (initially meant to protect against corporate/capitalism over reach like this) be turned against us and mangled by corps.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    initially meant to protect against corporate/capitalism over reach like this

    The article makes this argument much better than I can summarize, so I really recommend reading it, but the idea is that the promise of intellectual property rights as a protection for creative workers is fundamentally flawed and is not fit for that purpose even if it seems to be on the surface, rather than being an otherwise good idea that has been corrupted by corporate influence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •