#Tag · bonfire.mavnn.eu

I always enjoy reading how Cory Doctorow ( @pluralistic ) explains how complicated laws affect ordinary people’s lives. His deep dive on AI and copyright is highly recommended. One statement made me think:

“This is one of the rare instances in which a bad case made good law.”

What about trolling the system with bad cases to make good law? Maybe such resources are better spent this way than explaining the obvious again and again in an exhausting uphill battle…

https://pluralistic.net/2026/03/03/its-a-trap-2/

#ai #copyright

https://pluralistic.net

Pluralistic: Supreme Court saves artists from AI (03 Mar 2026)

DocM

@[email protected] · 5 hours ago

“This is one of the rare instances in which a bad case made good law.”

What about trolling the system with bad cases to make good law? Maybe such resources are better spent this way than explaining the obvious again and again in an exhausting uphill battle…

https://pluralistic.net/2026/03/03/its-a-trap-2/

#ai #copyright

https://pluralistic.net

Pluralistic: Supreme Court saves artists from AI (03 Mar 2026)

Emeritus Prof Christopher May

@[email protected] · 5 days ago

Good news: the Govt. has decided to pause its potential relaxation of copyright laws to facilitate the theft & scraping of 'protected' content by AI/LLM 'research'.

Less good: after a consultation which largely demonstrated significant support for leaving copyright as is, Labour is still thinking how it can accommodate Big Tech's demand to be allowed to steal information with impunity.

So copyright remains in play, leaving uncertainty for anyone depending on its rules.

#copyright #AI
h/t FT

Baldur Bjarnason

@[email protected] · 5 days ago

If you had any doubt that the rise of LLM tools is a threat to F/OSS, even beyond the fact that its trained on it without permission, and is now frequently used to replace it (why import a battle-tested library when you can have an "agent" half-ass it?), people are now using LLMs to create derivative rewrites of open source projects to give them cover for bullshit relicensing attempts.

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

Taran Rampersad

@[email protected] replied · 5 days ago

@baldur with the recent supreme court ruling on works created by llms being unable to be copyrighted...

#Copyright is for humans.

I ain't a lawyer. But that's an obvious problem for #vibecoding and #agenticai works.

An odd way to come at it for some, but there it is. From #SCOTUS.

https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

The Verge

AI-generated art can’t be copyrighted after Supreme Court declines to review the rule

A lower court previously said that “human authorship is a bedrock requirement of copyright.”

Cory Doctorow boosted

Paul Schoe

@[email protected] · 6 days ago

Very interesting read, this article explaining why AI works cannot get a copyright.

With several examples of interesting and sometimes funny rulings in the past.

One quote:
This is wonderful news for creative workers. It means that our bosses must pay humans to do work if they want to be granted copyright on the things they want to sell.

#AI #Copyright
@pluralistic

Cory Doctorow

@[email protected] · last week

The Supreme Court has just turned down a petition to hear an appeal in a case that held that AI works can't be copyrighted. By turning down the appeal, the Supreme Court took a massively consequential step to protect creative workers' interests:

https://www.theverge.com/policy/887678/supreme-court-ai-art-copyright

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/03/03/its-a-trap/#inheres-at-the-moment-of-fixation

The Supreme Court building. It has been tinted sepia. Floating in front of it are a 1920s-era Supreme Court, tinted blue-green, their heads replaced with the glaring red eyes of HAL 9000 from Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey,' and their hands tinted hot pink. They have been distorted with a ripple effect and TV scan lines. The sky is full of dark clouds.

Image:
Cryteria (modified)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg

CC BY 3.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en — The Supreme Court building. It has been tinted sepia. Floating in front of it are a 1920s-era Supreme Court, tinted blue-green, their heads replaced with the glaring red eyes of HAL 9000 from Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey,' and their hands tinted hot pink. They have been distorted with a ripple effect and TV scan lines. The sky is full of dark clouds. Image: Cryteria (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

https://pluralistic.net

Pluralistic: Supreme Court saves artists from AI (03 Mar 2026)

1 more link(s)

Paul Schoe

@[email protected] (and 1 other) recently replied · 6 days ago

Very interesting read, this article explaining why AI works cannot get a copyright.

With several examples of interesting and sometimes funny rulings in the past.

One quote:
This is wonderful news for creative workers. It means that our bosses must pay humans to do work if they want to be granted copyright on the things they want to sell.