←back to thread

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

(www.businessinsider.com)
393 points pyman | 2 comments | 07 Jul 25 09:20 UTC | HN request time: 0.426s | source
Show context
bgwalter ◴[07 Jul 25 14:38 UTC] No.44490836[source]▶
Here is how individuals are treated for massive copyright infringement:

https://investors.autodesk.com/news-releases/news-release-de...

replies(8): >>44490942 #>>44491257 #>>44491526 #>>44491536 #>>44491907 #>>44493281 #>>44493918 #>>44493925 #
piker ◴[07 Jul 25 14:47 UTC] No.44490942[source]▶
I thought you'd go with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Swartz
replies(1): >>44491359 #
dialup_sounds ◴[07 Jul 25 15:26 UTC] No.44491359[source]▶
Swartz wasn't charged with copyright infringement.
replies(2): >>44491626 #>>44492395 #
natch ◴[07 Jul 25 15:52 UTC] No.44491626[source]▶
*technically
replies(2): >>44492823 #>>44495279 #
1. kube-system ◴[07 Jul 25 17:44 UTC] No.44492823[source]▶
If you're discussing law, an entirely different law in a different title of US code is more than a technicality.
replies(1): >>44494363 #
2. piker ◴[07 Jul 25 20:30 UTC] No.44494363[source]▶
No, the parent was referring to how someone “was treated”, and it would have been perfectly valid to reference that case to make the same point.

What you’re saying is like calling Al Capone a tax cheat. Nonsense.

They went after Aaron over copyright.