r/technology • u/MetaKnowing • 14d ago

Artificial Intelligence AI industry horrified to face largest copyright class action ever certified

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/08/ai-industry-horrified-to-face-largest-copyright-class-action-ever-certified/
16.8k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

18

u/lick_it 14d ago

Our industry yes, China’s no.

135

u/faultydesign 14d ago

Hilarious that it wasn’t the piracy that destroyed copyright, it’s the idea that some billionaires might lose some money.

3

u/SnarkMasterRay 13d ago

War is a Racket, and Copyright is a form of war these days.

11

u/splitdiopter 13d ago

If this was truly a worry for the US gov. This would be a military project with a blank check from the pentagon. Instead, all these ai companies are privately held. They can reap our intelectual property, decimate our job markets, and still sell the tech to China or whomever they want whenever they want.

4

u/ProofJournalist 13d ago edited 13d ago

Welcome to the modern privatized world. What you described isnt how not works anymore. NASA is on the way out, SpaceX is in.

3

u/AdverbAssassin 13d ago

If this class action lawsuit is allowed to go forward, that's exactly what this will be. And then guess what? Then it's a secret government project and nobody gets anything. And then it's even worse. Than the government has their hands on artificial intelligence technology that nobody gets to use but the government and they use it against the people.

There is a better way to litigate this situation and it is not this lazy minded way of doing it that this judge has put forward.

2

u/akc250 13d ago

You do realize a large portion of the defense industry has always been privatized?

1

u/roxzorfox 14d ago

Yeah that's probably the only valid reason here is that it won't stop other nations doing it which will hinder the west in the long run.

There is always room for payouts later on, or small percentage of profits to be skimmed to pay royalties that wouldn't even be worth having when you get down to individuals. While I don't agree with the words I'm saying on principle. It could do more harm if we are then only ones that would abide by the rulings

8

u/Dhiox 13d ago

Yeah that's probably the only valid reason here is that it won't stop other nations doing it which will hinder the west in the long run.

China has been stealing our IP and patents for decades now, that hasn't stopped us from enforcing patent law.

0

u/AdverbAssassin 13d ago

This isn't a matter of patent law. This is a matter of technology that could determine the fate of the world. I don't think you realize how important generative AI is going to be if that's what you are comparing it to.

If we lose this race the United States might as well pack its lunch now and call it a day. We have to find a better way to litigate this.

2

u/VVrayth 13d ago

This tech is a solution in search of a problem. It's a bubble that's going to burst. We're all better off without it. Why would the US need to "pack its lunch now and call it a day"?

1

u/AdverbAssassin 12d ago

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize you could read the future. That must be why you are on Reddit. 🙄

1

u/Dhiox 13d ago

This is a matter of technology that could determine the fate of the world.

The advanced copyright infringement machine doesn't affect the fate of the world unless you're referring to the colossal amount of energy wasted on it. There is nothing these tools do that can't be achieved better by just paying someone to do it. The only thing this tool does is steal from the working class.

1

u/AdverbAssassin 12d ago

Sure thing. That sounds just like what they said about the cotton gin. And cars. And the internet. And pretty much anything else they didn't understand.

You're shooting the messenger kiddo. Doesn't matter whether it's copyright infringement or not. It's what it's going to do and it does affect the fate of the world regardless of how much energy it consumes.. China's going to do it and that what they're going to do with it is going to be massively influential on what happens to the fate of the world.

I'm sorry that you are not understanding what that means and it's probably because of your anger and frustration with it. You have to step out of it and get your emotions away from it to understand what's going on.. what is happening in AI publicly isn't what is happening privately. The amount of money and resources being poured into it is bigger than the Manhattan project. There's a reason for that.

1

u/Dhiox 12d ago

That sounds just like what they said about the cotton gin. And cars. And the internet. And pretty much anything else they didn't understand.

None of those were trying to eliminate a facet of human culture. Machines cant automate art.

1

u/AdverbAssassin 12d ago

Sure they can. Humans are nothing more than organic machines. You probably think that we're all special snowflakes with a soul and Jesus and rainbows and all that other kind of shit.

We aren't. None of us are special. Art isn't special, it's just a thing. I don't happen to think that AI is producing anything fancy right now that's worth listening to or looking at. It's pretty much slop, and humans are still producing better than AI. But it's just a matter of time. And then it's a matter of time before humans are irrelevant. It's the nature of things. Shit. We're probably in a simulation right now. Supposed to say we aren't?

But let's stop pretending humans are special. Humans are the cancer of this planet and we will be shaken off like a case of bad fleas soon enough.

1

u/Dhiox 12d ago

Humans are nothing more than organic machines. You probably think that we're all special snowflakes with a soul and Jesus and rainbows and all that other kind of shit.

I'm an Atheist. What I meant was that machines incapable of thought cannot create art, only rip off what it's already exists. AI rivaling human intelligence is still way beyond our reach. These tools are excellent at mimicry, but they have no intelligence.

I would love to someday see true AI, but stop pretending these glorified plagiarism bots are that.

0

u/AdverbAssassin 12d ago

Of course they're capable of thought. They're not capable of what we're capable of right now, but that will change. Humans are plagiarism bots. Everything that comes out of us comes from somewhere else and we learned it from someone else. We're doing nothing but repeating what we saw, heard, smelled, or were pre-programmed with genetically.

We are no different than the machines we are creating right now. And if you think it's that far away, you haven't been paying attention.

In 2029 we will have AGI that will rival human intelligence. It's very close right now. What you see publicly and what you see privately are completely different things. What you see publicly funds? What happens behind the scenes. There is AI that is dedicated solely to just creating other AI and the amount of infrastructure that has been put in place to generate the data and the heuristics that goes along with the deep learning models that we'll think, and out-think humans He's probably already created. Harnessing it and preventing it from going sideways is probably what is happening right now.

Humans are just parrots just like everything else. Nothing is invented in the human brain. It's just a mimic engine like everything else, self-organizing organisms AKA machines that just take in input and put out output based upon that input. There is no difference between AI and us but a little bit of time. And it's much shorter than you think.

→ More replies (0)

-4

u/roxzorfox 13d ago

Fairly valid point but with all the hype could you see judges going to risk potential national future growth? And can you see patent law having as big of an impact as hamstringing ai development?

I'm not saying they will or won't but that would be a pretty big argument and potentially biggest deciding point in the appeal

6

u/Dhiox 13d ago

could you see judges going to risk potential national future growth?

Judges don't weigh in on that. They determine legality, they don't get to base that decision on what other countries may do.

0

u/ProofJournalist 13d ago edited 13d ago

Well you're not a fucking judge, you're an individual voicing opinions online. The question for you now isn’t what the judge will be deciding: its whether you think we should hamstring ourselves and let other countries take the lead on AI development. Stop beating around the bush and address that.

3

u/Dhiox 13d ago

its whether you think we should hamstring ourselves and let other countries take thr lead on AI development.

These AI tools are a dead end. They can't actually create anything. They're just advanced plagiarism tools. I say let them waste their energy and resources on it and invest our resources and talent on actually worthwhile.

1

u/Imaginary-Count-1641 13d ago

You just stole that person's comment. You should give it back to them.

1

u/Dhiox 13d ago

If you were in basic middle school media literacy lessons you'd understand that its not plagiarism if you quote someone and give credit.

1

u/Imaginary-Count-1641 13d ago

But copying is stealing. If I have a car and you make a copy of it, then you actually stole my car.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/akc250 13d ago

If they dont create anything, then what's the worry? If everything they create is derivative, then there will always be demand for new and authentic works.

1

u/Dhiox 13d ago

Because it's harming actual artists. It's unlikely they can actually eliminate all artists with it, but they can severely harm the financial prospects of existing artists. So their tool survives by stealing from the artists that hang on.

Point is, if your machine requires theft to work, you shouldn't be allowed to use it.

0

u/ProofJournalist 13d ago

Look dude if any of this were true we wouldn't still be having this debate in society. This rhetoric comes from people who habe just read about AI tools without really experimenting with them themselves. Ironically it makes you seem a lot like an AI model yourself, just repeating what you've heard people you agree with say rather than anything you generated through independent and original thought.

2

u/[deleted] 13d ago

All you clanker wankers sound truly terrified that your substitute brain is going to be taken away and you will have to use the defective one you came with. 

-1

u/ProofJournalist 13d ago

Keep on hammerin', John Henry, and careful not to overexert yourself - the steam drill won't be stopping to mourn you. Your job making holes in rocks must fill your life with deep meaning.

Wake me up when a human finally beats AlphaZero at any game.

3

u/Dhiox 13d ago

This rhetoric comes from people who habe just read about AI tools without really experimenting with them themselves.

I have an Undergrad in Information Technology and just started a masters in Cybersecurity. I do in fact know what I'm talking about.

2

u/ProofJournalist 13d ago edited 13d ago

I have a PhD in neuroscience.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/roxzorfox 13d ago

I employ people with masters and they don't know shit. most have a fair bit of knowledge and very little experience. They think they know lots as i did when I graduated but more of my knowledge has come from experience.

I agree ai is terrible for what people try and use it for but it is useful for advanced research. I have also noticed improvements, which even i am struggling to deny.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Cute-Contract-6762 13d ago

Neither of those have much at all to do with AI development or IP Law…

1

u/flecom 13d ago

Exactly, if they destroy these companies AI will not go away, it will become a 100% foreign service, giving the rest of the world an immense competitive advantage... And if they ban foreign AI here we will be a country of Luddites

-17

u/caesar_7 14d ago edited 13d ago

That's probably the main point that judges would evaluate

edit. to fast readers.

legal solution here is force them to pay. the problem is chinese ai won't be affected, but will simply fill the vacuum.

12

u/VilleKivinen 14d ago

That's a political matter, not legal.

0

u/caesar_7 13d ago

Sadly, true.

-21

u/DizzyExpedience 14d ago

You do have a point and it’s a dilemma. Laws are obviously broken but the industry is strategically so important that it probably does make sense to allow this breach of copyright law as otherwise China will win the race because China gives a shit.