Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Hollywood Celebrities Ask Trump for Help Against AI
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 23:05:46 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <vrkrc9$2i51h$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vrcu2r$3fkd5$2@dont-email.me> <0001HW.2D8E1A8B05090CBE3064AA38F@news.giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 00:05:46 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ec16e0c62f74cacd8a252b4cf9678da7";
	logging-data="2692145"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Hu3PDYu8mV3UV4hLy4xly"
User-Agent: Usenapp/0.92.2/l for MacOS
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rnkaJ8Wx2poum7cdW3m0YTZsJhU=
Bytes: 3631

On Mar 21, 2025 at 3:07:07 PM PDT, "Pluted Pup" <plutedpup@outlook.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 16:02:51 -0700, BTR1701 wrote:
> 
>>  Ben Stiller, Mark Ruffalo and More Than 400 Hollywood Names Urge Trump to
>> Not
>>  Let AI Companies Exploit Copyrighted Works
>> 
>>  https://www.yahoo.com/news/ben-stiller-mark-ruffalo-more-215500154.html
> 
> This statement makes sense to me:
> 
> "It is clear that Google (valued at $2Tn) and OpenAI (valued at
> over $157Bn) are arguing for a special government exemption so
> they can freely exploit America´s creative and knowledge
> industries, despite their substantial revenues and available
> funds. There is no reason to weaken or eliminate the copyright
> protections that have helped America flourish. Not when AI
> companies can use our copyrighted material by simply doing what
> the law requires: negotiating appropriate licenses with copyright
> holders - just as every other industry does. Access to America´s
> creative catalog of films, writing, video content, and music is
> not a matter of national security. They do not require a
> government-mandated exemption from existing U.S. copyright law."
> 
> Granting exemptions to Google to violate copyright
> laws is a subsidy of Google by the taxpayers, a vast
> power to be used exclusively by the Google corporations.
> There is already illegally subsidized monopolization by Google,
> and this furthers it, effectively prohibiting competition
> to Google.
> 
> I'm reminded of Google's illegal dealings in federal court
> in partnership with the American Association Of Publishers,
> feigning as adversaries, tried to get the judge to decree a
> global monopoly on "orphan" works to Google. Judge Ito
> denied it, a hero to orphans, a disappointment to those
> who see that monopolization is inevitable and therefore
> desirable. Where's the actual move to re-publish
> orphan works, because that cause is not served by decreeing
> Google to be the world's exclusive "royal" publisher.
> 
> Or the new British "law" that says that hate speech
> is illegal but gives exemptions to specific news
> organizations, where a reader parrots or rebuts an
> approved privately owned news source and it's technically
> an imprisonable offense to do so. Other, "non-royal"
> news sources are not permitted to compete.

All that's great but it doesn't address the rank hypocrisy of all these
Hollywood elitists spending the better part of a decade calling a guy "worse
than Hitler", then expecting his help when it comes to protecting their
livelihoods.