←back to thread

Anthropic judge rejects $1.5B AI copyright settlement

(news.bloomberglaw.com)
290 points nobody9999 | 5 comments | 09 Sep 25 08:46 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
atleastoptimal ◴[09 Sep 25 19:15 UTC] No.45187251[source]▶
Copying files of scanned books isn’t worth a 1T dollar fine
replies(1): >>45190002 #
adrr ◴[09 Sep 25 22:09 UTC] No.45190002[source]▶
Maybe Anthropic should have paid attention to the law that has $150k statutory damages per violation if the infringement is willful. So much cheaper just to buy the books and scan it instead of violating a law that has a statutory damage clause.
replies(3): >>45190212 #>>45190597 #>>45191505 #
atleastoptimal ◴[10 Sep 25 00:26 UTC] No.45191505[source]▶
If a person pirates a book should they have to pay 150k?
replies(1): >>45195157 #
1. ch_fr ◴[10 Sep 25 09:10 UTC] No.45195157[source]▶
So true! I too think the average person is basically indistinguishable from anthropic.
replies(1): >>45217459 #
2. atleastoptimal ◴[12 Sep 25 00:21 UTC] No.45217459[source]▶
And I remember the part in copyright law where it says "if the violation is done by a big corporationy corportation, then the punishment must be more severe even on a per-violation basis"
replies(1): >>45219777 #
3. ch_fr ◴[12 Sep 25 07:52 UTC] No.45219777[source]▶
I mean, it's not crazy talk, you frame it as crazy but this difference in treatment is fairly normal. If punitive damages were limited to what an individual person could manage, they would hardly ever be "punitive" for corporate actors.

You're the second person I've talked to in this thread who thinks "The law is not applied with perfect consistency in practice!? Dear god why is it not like computer programs?".

It's just my personal take, but I don't think extreme rigidity and consistency in a "code is law" fashion would ever be desirable. look over to the crypto world to see how DAOs are faring.

replies(1): >>45227956 #
4. atleastoptimal ◴[12 Sep 25 23:41 UTC] No.45227956{3}[source]▶
150k per violation of copyright law by means of pirating a book is excessive even for the largest company in the world. I agree that punishment should be somewhat proportional so that "too big to fail" firms don't see it as just a fine to be accounted for as any expense, but among things that ought to be worth a a fine of that magnitude, downloading a book is not among them.
replies(1): >>45230250 #
5. ch_fr ◴[13 Sep 25 08:08 UTC] No.45230250{4}[source]▶
And I agree that 150k is dialing the slider a bit too high compared to an individual's offense, happy to meet you at the middle there.