In a much watched case of Music industry heavy weights going after ISP Texan ISP Grande Communications Networks, we may find out how far the courts will go to protect creators. So far the courts have agreed that when an ISP is told repeatedly about infringement by users, action should be taken. The ISP, of course, fights to keep its users and ignore their illegal activity, because, you know, money. So the fight continues and may go all the way up to the Supreme Court.
Here’s the deal: Libertarians have for forever argued that there should be no laws on companies and the zeitgeist will move things to the proper balance. The argument goes that people will hold companies accountable. But that’s some BS, we all know it. Companies are big enough to lie and hide info unless someone else with money finds it and takes them to courts. Our system is built with minimal fines so most companies just pay the fines. Unless a court steps in and makes a ruling that forces them to do anything, a company will always maximize profits to the detriment of anyone else.
As AI “Fair Use” travels through the court system, we are about to see the change that I don’t think people really want to see happen. If the courts say ISPs don’t have to take action in line with the DMCA, then they won’t, and more infringement will occur. If the courts side with AI companies and say that any IP an AI company can steal (they used torrents to steal the works when they couldn’t find them elsewhere), then copyright loses its value, and the only value IP has is in being behind a firewall and being protected. The Internet then turns into people giving away their IP for free and a new level of firewall protection that blocks all content from being downloaded or distributed unless you pay. I’m pretty sure the average user doesn’t want that.
PS Gen AI image “motivated by the phrase ‘The fall of copyright'” brought to you by “simple” and replacing … basic graphic design work?
