The idea that we should dispense with it to let generative AI companies make even more money seems totally bizarre.
The idea is that we should remove abuses of copyright to allow our society to move forward, and thereby continue to exist.
Imagine if there was a law at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution that said when non-human labor was used, the Animal Welfare Office had veto power. Then imagine that the Animal Welfare Office declared steam engines to be immoral, and so steam engines were never used in industry, at least not in the Wester World. The Orient would eventually rise as the world's only industrial power.
In the same way, if we let the copyright industry veto generative AI, it will destroy the Western World.
Our students are already at a huge disadvantage compared to Chinese students who get every book ever translated into Chinese for free (except a few immoral works that they would not want to see anyway.)
Those who pose an existential threat to our civilization are rent seekers who abuse copyright in the US to go beyond protecting "science and the useful arts," who seek infinite copyright terms, who grab every creative work We The People create and register lying paperwork to ensure they can steal our creative genius to enrich their cabal.
If this was only a for-profit scheme, it would not be so bad. Do you remember when they Hollyweird degenerates sued a Christian company that wanted to put our G-rated versions of the movies aimed at children? The Christian company never suggested they not pay for the movies. No matter what the Christian company was willing to pay, they were not allowed to publish child-friendly versions of the movies. This proves Hollyweird's goal is to push degeneracy.
The battle against abuses of copyright is a fight for Western Civilization. The fight against abuses of copyright if a fight for our souls.
If anyone is curious, this is what is being semi-accuratly referenced: https://www.crosswalk.com/culture/features/editing-companies...
Whole I disagree that the motivation is "degeneracy" and I doubt that there isn't a sum large enough to get studios on board, it is a pretty interesting example to bring up when discussing how much control we should give copyright holders.
Notably, it is legal to have a filter that changes playback not legal to provide a modified version of the original, even if you paid for that original.
Why stop there? There's a ton of child labour in China and other part of the world that yield economic advantages. Should we let that happen in the western world too?
AI is wonderful in so many ways. But we should not throw out our entire way of life to adapt to a new technology.
How's that bizarre, if as you state copyright has always been based on "money makes right" not some moral stance?
