This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
However, Newton’s report comes as the Wall Street Journal is also examining Facebook’s efforts to block plagiarized and pirated content. According to the Wall Street Journal, though several researchers at Facebook proposed ways to decrease the reach of such content, those proposals were “deprioritized” by Mark Zuckerberg.
I don’t find this argument convincing given the ability today to license many content types at scale for TDM, including images, music and yes, journal articles (See “Full disclosure” above), but it is an argument often offered by infringers. Open licenses can create a very practical challenge for users who go beyond the terms.
In order to train their technologies, should AI companies be allowed to use works under copyright protection without consent? The lawsuits brought by the owners of such works, including artworks in the case of image-generators and journalism in the NYT case, claim that this should not be allowed. Fair Use Precedent?
The website does not have a notice about not being allowed to use them. Is it still considered copyrightinfringement to use them? law, a copyright owner does not need to include a copyrightnotice on published works, nor does the owner need to post notices barring the use of the work.
If the work was published with proper copyrightnotice, it received a federal statutory copyright. If the work was published without proper copyrightnotice, the work entered the public domain. But releasing full sound recordings of interviews for sale is far less transformative than standard journalism.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content