All that infringing content wouldn’t have been on NFT marketplaces to begin with if commercial entities could “make this work”
If the market as a whole cannot get it working, then my solution doesnt need to be perfect either. But this url proves that "best practices" are at 92%: https://tpgames.org/seo.png so if courts are asking how well we're implementing our system, 92% is where we're at.
This isn't required. There's another alternative that comes with copyright maximalist principles. I.e. you can block more works than law actually requires. This practice of overblocking will avoid the 1-1 matching against all works on the planet, and allow blocking large sections of the world. Like if I decide that mp4 files are too dangerous because they allow attaching hollywood's blockbuster movies to the files, I can block all .mp4 files from my system. While this does some overblocking, i.e. ordinary people's home videos go with the bathwater, but it also avoids all copyright infringement from mp4 area.
This kind of decisions to block whole technology areas are not done without careful competitive assessment, but there are situations like the hollywood movies which force such actions.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
The big question is how do you select a large enough set of people to ask, so that all works are covered.
Covering all works is not required. You only need to do this for popular works. And if humans still remember the work, it can be considered popular. Obviously checking against all works under copyright in the whole world is impossible operation, but human brains have billions of connections available in them, and thus the best database coverage can be obtained by asking real humans to evaluate the copyright status. This is the best available technology, and courts are bound to accept the best solution in the world as a solution to this problem. While we're still far away from the full coverage, the best available solution is already enough.
Note that this solution doesn't come as a surprise to courts, as copyright was designed when computers simply didn't exist. The best available solution has not changed even after technology has been developed for 200 years.
You couldn’t even prevent yourself from violating copyright once.
It's enough that my customers are able to avoid infringements. There's good assumption that the customers are not criminal masterminds. So we can allow them to play with a sandbox and if they find ways to overcome the barriers that prevent infringements, it's time to shutdown the service and develop some more safeguards against infringements. This is how NFT marketplaces are handling the issue, i.e. they let their customers play with the system and got 80% of plagiarism, fake collections and spam, but now they're back to drawing board and trying to design a system that prevents the misuse. If commercial entities worth 2 billion stock credits are able to make this work, why wouldn't meshpage be able to do that same thing? These claims that its impossible for meshpage but NFT marketplaces are doing the same thing...
because the only way tp can get what he wants is for an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent supernatural deity to do all the work for him.
software has nice property that computers are executing the rules. Thus I need to just write working rules once, and then it's up to computers to enforce those rules. This is why omnipotent deity is not needed.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
Can't be done without a full database of all works under copyright to check every new work against.
This database already exists. It's stored in human brains. All I need to do is ask real humans to evaluate the copyright status of my work. Once some of the reviewers realize that some model is owned by some unknown person who I've not heard before, then I can drop that model from the front page, and move to reviewing next block of works.
Basically all my customers have the information which works are ripped off from existing works. Extracting that information from customers takes a little bit of work, but you've already seen that approach to work with scott cawthon, i.e. when my customers find out scott's name, I can evaluate the information and stop distributing the questionable material.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
Impossible, what you are describing in completely impossible.
This is why it's a good challenge for master programmer like myself. I didn't expect idiots from techdirt to be able to do it, but professional programmers are able to find shortcuts powerful enough that it can crack the nut.
It's a business model called "copyright trolling".
That would be suing people and demanding money. But my approach to copyright is creating technologies that have copyright rules built-in to the technology. It's a win-win, i.e. tech developers get money doing it, and customers get assurances that their children wont accidentally ruin their lives by committing copyright infringements. This kind of technology that has been designed for current copyright environment is important before you can sell your products to children who do not yet understand copyright's fine details. The sandbox for children need to be safe environment where they can play and experiment with different techniques without causing large copyright damage.
Notably, you have yet to pay stricter copyright law fines to Scott Cawthon.
There's no fines for situation where the content is taken offline when problems are first found. Strict copyright law following allows this "take offline" operation..
It's the sloppy practices involved in copyright minimalism which need to pay huge fines when they refuse the take content offline when problems are found.
The law is clear, innocent infringement is activated only when content is taken offline easily.
If the copyright rules you keep on proposing were to be enforced, the world would become quieter that a Trappist monastery.
This isn't a big problem. NFTs have shown us that the real problem is recognizing who is the owner of the material, when there's millions of people offering products that they didn't create themselves. Basically NFT marketplaces are in huge trouble when they cannot recognize who is actual author and who is copycat who pilfered someone else's work. see this https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/nft-marketplace-shuts-citing-rampant-fakes-plagiarism-probl em-2022-02-11/
Basically we need the world to be silent and only the authors should be talking. The copyright ownership is so powerful that only the owners are allowed to talk, but there currently is no way to filter out people who do not own copyright for the works.
Copyright is supposed to protect interpretations of ideas, not the idea itself.
The analysis should focus more on "who is the owner of each part of the image?"..
i.e. when the statue is clearly owned by the estate, or if there were famous buildings displayed in the cartoon, each such element of the newspaper image has some owner attached to it... When owner is clearly someone else than the person taking image with the camera, license arrangements need to be done.
The idea/expression division doesnt matter, when you just need to examine every part of the image and find the owner. Are you claiming that selling mockups of statue of liberty is allowed without paying license fees to the owner of the statue?
Instead of waiting for copyright owners to get bankrupteed, the newspaper could try to get a license to display the statue in the newspaper. I'm sure the license fees are significantly lower if the estate does not need to sue the newspaper to get their money. Its just laziness on the part of the newspaper, if they do not get licenses for the images they publish, and part of that permission analysis is that they check owners of buildings or landmarks they publish.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re:
You can get these same numbers by launching chrome, going to developer tools, lighthouse and clicking "generate report"...
Note that techdirt is getting significantly worse result than meshpage.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re:
If the market as a whole cannot get it working, then my solution doesnt need to be perfect either. But this url proves that "best practices" are at 92%: https://tpgames.org/seo.png so if courts are asking how well we're implementing our system, 92% is where we're at.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re:
the mansion doesn't have any round corners, so pi is not needed.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re:
its possible to manually check all submitted content... Once verified to be free of infringement, it's allowed to publish it on your web page..
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re:
This isn't required. There's another alternative that comes with copyright maximalist principles. I.e. you can block more works than law actually requires. This practice of overblocking will avoid the 1-1 matching against all works on the planet, and allow blocking large sections of the world. Like if I decide that mp4 files are too dangerous because they allow attaching hollywood's blockbuster movies to the files, I can block all .mp4 files from my system. While this does some overblocking, i.e. ordinary people's home videos go with the bathwater, but it also avoids all copyright infringement from mp4 area.
This kind of decisions to block whole technology areas are not done without careful competitive assessment, but there are situations like the hollywood movies which force such actions.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
Covering all works is not required. You only need to do this for popular works. And if humans still remember the work, it can be considered popular. Obviously checking against all works under copyright in the whole world is impossible operation, but human brains have billions of connections available in them, and thus the best database coverage can be obtained by asking real humans to evaluate the copyright status. This is the best available technology, and courts are bound to accept the best solution in the world as a solution to this problem. While we're still far away from the full coverage, the best available solution is already enough.
Note that this solution doesn't come as a surprise to courts, as copyright was designed when computers simply didn't exist. The best available solution has not changed even after technology has been developed for 200 years.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re:
It's enough that my customers are able to avoid infringements. There's good assumption that the customers are not criminal masterminds. So we can allow them to play with a sandbox and if they find ways to overcome the barriers that prevent infringements, it's time to shutdown the service and develop some more safeguards against infringements. This is how NFT marketplaces are handling the issue, i.e. they let their customers play with the system and got 80% of plagiarism, fake collections and spam, but now they're back to drawing board and trying to design a system that prevents the misuse. If commercial entities worth 2 billion stock credits are able to make this work, why wouldn't meshpage be able to do that same thing? These claims that its impossible for meshpage but NFT marketplaces are doing the same thing...
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
Pi's value is 3, so last digit is also 3.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re:
software has nice property that computers are executing the rules. Thus I need to just write working rules once, and then it's up to computers to enforce those rules. This is why omnipotent deity is not needed.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
This database already exists. It's stored in human brains. All I need to do is ask real humans to evaluate the copyright status of my work. Once some of the reviewers realize that some model is owned by some unknown person who I've not heard before, then I can drop that model from the front page, and move to reviewing next block of works.
Basically all my customers have the information which works are ripped off from existing works. Extracting that information from customers takes a little bit of work, but you've already seen that approach to work with scott cawthon, i.e. when my customers find out scott's name, I can evaluate the information and stop distributing the questionable material.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
This is why it's a good challenge for master programmer like myself. I didn't expect idiots from techdirt to be able to do it, but professional programmers are able to find shortcuts powerful enough that it can crack the nut.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
That would be suing people and demanding money. But my approach to copyright is creating technologies that have copyright rules built-in to the technology. It's a win-win, i.e. tech developers get money doing it, and customers get assurances that their children wont accidentally ruin their lives by committing copyright infringements. This kind of technology that has been designed for current copyright environment is important before you can sell your products to children who do not yet understand copyright's fine details. The sandbox for children need to be safe environment where they can play and experiment with different techniques without causing large copyright damage.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Here's the whole history of the practice:
https://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/reese/reese_innocent_infringement.pdf
If your googling skills cannot find that paperwork when needed, your computer skills might need some improvement.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re: Re:
There's no fines for situation where the content is taken offline when problems are first found. Strict copyright law following allows this "take offline" operation..
It's the sloppy practices involved in copyright minimalism which need to pay huge fines when they refuse the take content offline when problems are found.
The law is clear, innocent infringement is activated only when content is taken offline easily.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: Re: Re: get the license instead
That sounds like a good business plan... usually when you stumble into something that does not yet exist, it becomes good business plan...
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: get the license instead
This isn't a big problem. NFTs have shown us that the real problem is recognizing who is the owner of the material, when there's millions of people offering products that they didn't create themselves. Basically NFT marketplaces are in huge trouble when they cannot recognize who is actual author and who is copycat who pilfered someone else's work. see this https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/nft-marketplace-shuts-citing-rampant-fakes-plagiarism-probl em-2022-02-11/
Basically we need the world to be silent and only the authors should be talking. The copyright ownership is so powerful that only the owners are allowed to talk, but there currently is no way to filter out people who do not own copyright for the works.
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
Re: Re: get the license instead
The analysis should focus more on "who is the owner of each part of the image?"..
i.e. when the statue is clearly owned by the estate, or if there were famous buildings displayed in the cartoon, each such element of the newspaper image has some owner attached to it... When owner is clearly someone else than the person taking image with the camera, license arrangements need to be done.
The idea/expression division doesnt matter, when you just need to examine every part of the image and find the owner. Are you claiming that selling mockups of statue of liberty is allowed without paying license fees to the owner of the statue?
On the post: Danish Court Confirms Insane 'Little Mermaid' Copyright Ruling Against Newspaper Over Cartoon
get the license instead
Instead of waiting for copyright owners to get bankrupteed, the newspaper could try to get a license to display the statue in the newspaper. I'm sure the license fees are significantly lower if the estate does not need to sue the newspaper to get their money. Its just laziness on the part of the newspaper, if they do not get licenses for the images they publish, and part of that permission analysis is that they check owners of buildings or landmarks they publish.
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You mean its not enough that t is part of web3?
On the post: PUBG Corp. At It Again: Sues Garena, Apple, And Google For Copyright Infringement Over 'Free Fire' App
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
if you're looking for a failure, you'll always stumble into something. But the real solution is to look for what advantages the solution offered has.
perfection isn't about what failures you can avoid, but more about how well you can implement some specific requirements.
Next >>