I think it could be argued that the sites didnt publish anything in Britain, but instead British subjects reached across the pond and read stuff that was posted in America. Blame your own people.
Hopefully this gets decided based on constitutional law and not merely on the technicality that they were incorrectly served notice.
This should not be allowed. You fail to indict one time and that should be it.
Seems like AI is a loser on both sides. First they are liable for copyright infringement for the training, and then anything they create cannot be copyrighted so it can be taken without compensation.
I dont see the point of broadband grants if they arent allowed to make broadband affordable. What else could it legitimately be used for?
If homelessness is a crime how do they ever get out of incarceration? They are still homeless, unless you consider jail a home. And if and when they get out will they be immediately arrested because obviously they have no where to go?
CBS folded because the merger was worth far more than the payout. WSJ isnt in that same boat afaik.
This isnt helping anyone but CBS and they dont care. The $16M they paid is not coming back, and they are getting their merger. Giving in on Epstein is only helping Trump and the GOP.
An inconclusive means the bullet markings dont match the gun it was fired from. If it doesnt match the gun it was fired from then it is possible that it could match some other gun that it was not fired from. Too many inconclusives proves that markings arent conclusive in general.
Its always been common courtesy for newspapers that are reporting on someone to ask that person if they have any comment on it. Im not seeing how this would be new.
class action lawsuits instead of individual lawsuits.
Does this quash all previous nationwide injunctions?
I think the authors failed to argue that their book sales were hurt by AI because they werent. Even if an AI could theoretically output large portions of a book, still no one uses it to opt out of buying the book. Judge Chhabria is mistaken to believe they could successfully argue that point because an argument isnt enough in any court. You need evidence too.
IMO this is a violation of the 10th amendment. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. If the feds wont regulate it then states should be free to.
Id would have thought that even before AI you would be required to check your citations before submitting them. If you had an intern do the research you still had to check their cites, didnt you? You cant just trust an assistant whether human or machine.
They know they take their orders from the Governor so why did they take orders from Trump? IIUC they are not part of the army so there is no chain of command going to the president.
If the law says only in case of rebellion and the president has NOT declared the city to be in rebellion, then it isnt a debatable point. Its legally not in rebellion. You cant say only the president has the power to decide that. He hasnt, so it isnt.
Sorry typo. I meant to say the state national guard is NOT part of that military the president has authority over. They dont have to follow his orders any more than you or I do.
compliance is legitimate??
You say "It is perfectly legitimate in principle for other countries to set other standards and to compel compliance with those standards." Ok then what if it was China? Would you still think they had a right to compel compliance with their internet rules? Saying every country has the right to regulate the entire world wide internet is ridiculous.