• @Rivalarrival
    link
    21 year ago

    Every single transmission of data is a copy. Receiving data is not. The person creating the copy is the sender, not the receiver.

    • @maynarkh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      I feel you guys are arguing very precise legal matters without defining the jurisdiction. I mean sure, go ahead, but it’s meaningless. One could say “I live in this random country and we don’t even have a concept of copyright, therefore it does not exist!”

      • @Rivalarrival
        link
        41 year ago

        Sarah Silverman is an American actress. OpenAI is an American country. Relevant jurisdiction was defined in the headline.

    • @vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      eh it gets fuzzy. the sender transmits, but the receiver also writes a copy. it gets copied to the wire, and it gets copied from the wire. there is an ephemeral intermediate copy “on the wire”. I guess there’s no right answer; it’s like a fractal, the answer keeps changing when you look deeper

      • @Rivalarrival
        link
        11 year ago

        eh it gets fuzzy. the sender transmits, but the receiver also writes a copy

        Got a Ring doorbell? A security camera? If I walk up to your camera and start playing a copyrighted work, have you infringed on copyright? Of course not. The recording you saved now contains a copy of the work, but you were privileged in recording at the time.

        That doesn’t change when you ask me to come “send” that work to your camera. You are free to ask for something that I am not obligated to provide. If I choose to provide it, I am the infringing party, not you.

        Downloading is no different. You ask me to use a specific protocol to send a specific work to a specific port at a specific address. I can choose to do that, or I can tell you to pound sand. If I choose to send it, I am the infringing party, not you.

        The specific processes applied by the computer to save and replay the work would not qualify as “copying” under copyright law. If they did, viewing any copyrighted work would be an infringement, as the computer uses those same processes to view legitimate copies as illegitimate.