Tumgik
#copyright law
the-irreverend · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
My own stupid-ass way of celebrating our long-awaited ownership of Mickey Mouse.
Yes, I'm a Nimona fan, shut up y'all.
4K notes · View notes
liberaljane · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
Steamboat Willie just entered the public domain, and it looks like he has a new mission
Digital illustration of steamboat Willie on a ship with abortion pills headed for Florida.
4K notes · View notes
thecolacorporation · 3 days
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
Last week I received a cease and desist letter, claiming that my F*CK THE LAPD design was in violation of LAPD intellectual property. A few days later my lawyer sent this letter, seen here in its entirety.
2K notes · View notes
phoenixyfriend · 4 months
Text
Also did you know that the reason NYT can sue openAI with the expectation of success is that the AI cites its sources about as well as James Somerton.
It regurgitates long sections of paywalled NYT articles verbatim, and then cites it wrong, if at all. It's not just a matter of stealing traffic and clicks etc, but also illegal redistribution and damaging the NYT's brand regarding journalistic integrity by misquoting or citing incorrectly.
OpenAI cannot claim fair use under these circumstances lmao.
3K notes · View notes
megatome · 3 months
Text
Tumblr media
twitter didnt appreciate this take but I thought you guys would
824 notes · View notes
transformativeworks · 8 months
Text
Tell the Copyright Office About AI
Tumblr media
Concerned about AI?  The U.S. Copyright Office is asking for public comments and fans can add their voices. Read more at: https://otw.news/0bd40f
2K notes · View notes
reasonsforhope · 8 months
Note
got anything good, boss?
Sure do!
-
"Weeks after The New York Times updated its terms of service (TOS) to prohibit AI companies from scraping its articles and images to train AI models, it appears that the Times may be preparing to sue OpenAI. The result, experts speculate, could be devastating to OpenAI, including the destruction of ChatGPT's dataset and fines up to $150,000 per infringing piece of content.
NPR spoke to two people "with direct knowledge" who confirmed that the Times' lawyers were mulling whether a lawsuit might be necessary "to protect the intellectual property rights" of the Times' reporting.
Neither OpenAI nor the Times immediately responded to Ars' request to comment.
If the Times were to follow through and sue ChatGPT-maker OpenAI, NPR suggested that the lawsuit could become "the most high-profile" legal battle yet over copyright protection since ChatGPT's explosively popular launch. This speculation comes a month after Sarah Silverman joined other popular authors suing OpenAI over similar concerns, seeking to protect the copyright of their books.
Of course, ChatGPT isn't the only generative AI tool drawing legal challenges over copyright claims. In April, experts told Ars that image-generator Stable Diffusion could be a "legal earthquake" due to copyright concerns.
But OpenAI seems to be a prime target for early lawsuits, and NPR reported that OpenAI risks a federal judge ordering ChatGPT's entire data set to be completely rebuilt—if the Times successfully proves the company copied its content illegally and the court restricts OpenAI training models to only include explicitly authorized data. OpenAI could face huge fines for each piece of infringing content, dealing OpenAI a massive financial blow just months after The Washington Post reported that ChatGPT has begun shedding users, "shaking faith in AI revolution." Beyond that, a legal victory could trigger an avalanche of similar claims from other rights holders.
Unlike authors who appear most concerned about retaining the option to remove their books from OpenAI's training models, the Times has other concerns about AI tools like ChatGPT. NPR reported that a "top concern" is that ChatGPT could use The Times' content to become a "competitor" by "creating text that answers questions based on the original reporting and writing of the paper's staff."
As of this month, the Times' TOS prohibits any use of its content for "the development of any software program, including, but not limited to, training a machine learning or artificial intelligence (AI) system.""
-via Ars Technica, August 17, 2023
741 notes · View notes
fansplaining · 5 months
Text
But actually? Fan creators might be the “real” artists here. Because fan creators know that all art is built on building blocks. It’s not hidden; it’s explicit. Fan creators know that creativity isn’t a finite resource that needs to be kept behind lock and key. With those same basic building blocks, from trope to trope and fandom to fandom, an infinite amount of vitally important creativity can be built. We know; we’ve done it. The law just needs to catch up. 
— @earlgreytea68 in her article "How U.S. Copyright Law Fails Fan Creators." Read it, then listen (or read a transcript) of our conversation with her in our most recent episode, "The Copyright Conundrum."
428 notes · View notes
thealieninhiding · 1 year
Text
PSA Sherlock Holmes is already Public Domain. (in 2022)
Edit: Happy Public Domain Day / Happy New Year.
- - -
In the UK and many other countries all of the canon has been public domain for decades. On January 1st 2023 aka Public Domain Day "The Adventure of the Veiled Lodger" and "The Adventure of Shoscombe Old Place" last two Sherlock Holmes works by Doyle still protected by copyright enter the public domain in the United States. The consequences of that are as follows: you can now adapt, rewrite, remix, make derivatives of those last Casebook stories and any elements within. That is it.
The Conan Doyle Estate Ltd has lost lawsuits over the fact that Sherlock, the characters, and any and all elements of the books in the public domain can be used to create works.
You can right now legally make, sell, publish derivative work of Holmes stories (except the last 2), make original stories or any and all characters (not introduced in the last 2 stories) and have them interact in any way, shipping to your hearts content
You cannot now nor in January legally make derivative works of the still copyrighted adaptation, original material from the BBC, Guy Ritchie, Enola Holmes, pastiches or any other source is protected.
This post was brought to you by
🌈Autistic Special Interests🌈
and the inability to know if tumblr posters are serious in thinking that it’s important to allow legal Holmes/Watson creative work. Some people are definitely confused about the PD status of Holmes so hopefully this clears that up.
2K notes · View notes
titleknown · 1 year
Link
So, there’s three terrible copyright acts in Congress they’re trying to push into “must-pass” legislation, so they can forcibly be shoved through under our noses, and we in the US need to call our Congresspeople to tell them to not let them in.
The three terrible bills are:
The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA) (the one that’s basically a chokepoint on linking anything online_
The Stopping Harmful Offers on Platforms by Screening Against Fakes in E-commerce Act (SHOP SAFE) (Which I talked about ages ago, and oh god, it is bad)
The Strengthening Measures to Advance Rights Technologies Copyright Act (The one that’s going to mandate filters)
Here’s where you can find your representatives and senators and their contact information via your address or zip code.
You should call them especially soon, because you know they’re going to use the lack of scrutiny post-election to try and slip them in, so we need to get on their asses well after the last vote has been counted.
Remember, just voting isn’t enough, and senators mainly respond to messages about this stuff in volume, IE gathering how many they get on a certain bill to know about the broad opinions on it.
But luckily, a lot of people apparently don’t call in, so it’s possible with even at least a modest swell to get a backlog of “Hey, this bill sucks, kill it” messages! So yeah!
2K notes · View notes
ravensvalley · 6 months
Text
Tumblr media
#Ownership&Copyright
I know that most Artists work very hard to make a perfect creative work to their own eyes and than when ready, willing to let it go public because they're proud of their accomplishment. And when those creative works are not respected, it is simply like being stabed for Owners.
It's important to respect Copyright Law by obtaining permission or a license when using someone else's creative work, giving the proper attribution.
So that is why sometimes I'm not reacting to some publications and in worst case scenario, I must unfollow or even block some accounts. I cannot afford to jeopardize my account. It is particularly important to encourage innovation and protect the rights of Creators of any kind of works.
To me Ownership and Copyright Law = respect for everyone; anywhere around the World.
246 notes · View notes
the-irreverend · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
I don't know what inspired me to make this dumb shitpost, but here it is.
411 notes · View notes
kaiasky · 7 months
Text
look, it's very simple. plagiarism is legal and bad. copyright infringement is illegal and good. Don't get it twisted
274 notes · View notes
ecrivainsolitaire · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
We need to open more conversations about software, intellectual property and tech literacy because every time something new happens on the internet everyone enters into crisis mode without actually knowing what to do about it. A lot of the moral panic over AI is this: nitpicking about names and scaremongering about art theft without really understanding any of the technology or legal frameworks they're discussing. (This is not to say AI is without its criticisms but people have been dropping the ball on this because they're focused on the wrong part of the equation.) A lot of the talk about NFTs and Twitter has been the same: dunking on technological changes without really understanding the root of the problem, mostly for clout and virtue signalling. We need to bring back the discussions of the early internet: freedom of information, privacy rights, right to repair, open source and public domain sustainability. Tumblr is mostly worried about moral righteousness and support, and those are all good things, but in this cyberpunk dystopia it's more important than ever to have a handle on the way technology influences our lives and how we can control it. Freedom of information is mutual aid. Digital autonomy is fighting the tech monopolies. Data gathering is the first step of capitalist propaganda. We can only crush our oppressors if we learn how to stop depending on them.
225 notes · View notes
fyeahcopyright · 4 months
Text
Tumblr media
Mickey art by @foxestacado; Magic Kingdom photo by @heidi8.
I took my first Copyright Law class in 1993; just after the term concluded, certain motion pictures had their copyrights restored because of NAFTA, but the copyright terms for things like the Marx Bros' Animal Crackers, and yes, the original Mickey Mouse cartoons including Steamboat Willie and Plane Crazy were supposed to expire by the early 2000s, free for use by anyone, for any purpose (other than trademark infringement).
As we all know, they did not; the 1998 Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act stretched the term from 75 years to 95 years after first publication, keeping the public domain closed for 20 years -- but those 95 years expire at midnight on January 1, 2024 for Steamboat Willie -- as well as Virginia Woolf's Orlando, the picture book Millions of Cats, a few of my favorite songs from Burt Kalmar & Harry Ruby, and the first sound recording of "Yes! We Have No Bananas!"
What does this mean for creativity? It's unpredictable! Will there be more productions of Threepenny Opera? Stage musical versions of Animal Crackers -- or Marx Bros VR? More tiktoks and YouTube videos set to songs our great grandparents enjoyed, now that the sea shanty trend is over? Will there be horror movie versions of early Mickey cartoons, the way some indie filmmakers did a horror movie version of Winnie the Pooh when the first Milne book went into the public domain a few years ago? Will there be a sequel to that horror film featuring Tigger now that His Bounciness is entering the public domain? Will I do a video setting Mickey to "Mack the Knife"? Perhaps!
But I and everyone else needs to remember that Disney still holds trademark rights in Mickey Mouse -- the original version and the evolutions since -- so it'll be important to include a disclaimer or notice that any follow-on work based on things in the public domain is not owned, created or distributed by Disney or the other relevant brand-owner.
What will I be doing to mark the occasion? I'm planning on celebrating the public domain moment *at* Walt Disney World; I need to feel it in my soul; I expect fireworks, and absolutely no recognition from anyone other than me (and possibly my family who tolerate my ridiculousness on this) about the momentousness of the moment. I may livestream it.
I've been waiting for this moment for thirty years, and I can't believe I finally get to celebrate it this week! Creativity is magic, and it'll be fascinating to see what happens next!
77 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media
The Communist Mousefesto #1
78 notes · View notes