←back to thread

Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge

(www.businessinsider.com)
390 points pyman | 1 comments | 07 Jul 25 09:20 UTC | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
trinsic2 ◴[07 Jul 25 15:16 UTC] No.44491270[source]▶
I'm not seeing how this is fair use in either case.

Someone correct me if I am wrong but aren't these works being digitized and transformed in a way to make a profit off of the information that is included in these works?

It would be one thing for an individual to make person use of one or more books, but you got to have some special blindness not to see that a for-profit company's use of this information to improve a for-profit model is clearly going against what copyright stands for.

replies(8): >>44491399 #>>44491424 #>>44491457 #>>44491657 #>>44492008 #>>44492099 #>>44493528 #>>44495414 #
1. skybrian ◴[07 Jul 25 15:55 UTC] No.44491657[source]▶
Copyright is largely about distributing copies. It’s not about making something vaguely similar or about referencing copyrighted work to make something vaguely similar.

Although, there’s an exception for fictional characters:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_protection_for_fic...