Tag: law

Reads Like Victory

Remember this any time someone tells you that it’s not possible to make a difference in this world. The Cavalry did this.

The Updated Steam Subscriber Agreement

We’d like to share some information about recent updates to the Steam Subscriber Agreement (SSA), which mainly relate to how any disputes between Valve and Steam users are resolved.

We’ve eliminated the requirement that disputes be resolved by individual arbitration. As always, we encourage you to contact Steam Support when you have any issues, as that will nearly always be the best way to reach a solution. But if that doesn’t work, the updated SSA now provides that any disputes are to go forward in court instead of arbitration. We’ve also removed the class action waiver, as well as the cost and fee-shifting provisions, that were in prior versions of the SSA.

The whole approach was abusive and poorly conceived from the start.

Tech companies: You MUST arbitrate!
Users: Okay, let’s arbitrate.
Tech companies: NOOO! We will take you to court to avoid arbitration!
Court: You all said you wanted arbitration and you stuck them with it. So arbitrate, bitches!
Tech companies: (change terms of agreement)

DISCUSS ON SG

Authors Sue ChatGPT

I’m not privy to the technical details, but based upon what I understand of how AIs are trained and how they work, I suspect the authors have a very strong case against the defendants.

John Grisham, Jodi Picoult and George R.R. Martin are among 17 authors suing OpenAI for “systematic theft on a mass scale,” the latest in a wave of legal action by writers concerned that artificial intelligence programs are using their copyrighted works without permission.

In papers filed Tuesday in federal court in New York, the authors alleged “flagrant and harmful infringements of plaintiffs’ registered copyrights” and called the ChatGPT program a “massive commercial enterprise” that is reliant upon “systematic theft on a mass scale.”

The suit was organized by the Authors Guild and also includes David Baldacci, Sylvia Day, Jonathan Franzen and Elin Hilderbrand among others.

“It is imperative that we stop this theft in its tracks or we will destroy our incredible literary culture, which feeds many other creative industries in the U.S.,” Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger said in a statement. “Great books are generally written by those who spend their careers and, indeed, their lives, learning and perfecting their crafts. To preserve our literature, authors must have the ability to control if and how their works are used by generative AI.”

The lawsuit cites specific ChatGPT searches for each author, such as one for Martin that alleges the program generated “an infringing, unauthorized, and detailed outline for a prequel” to “A Game of Thrones” that was titled “A Dawn of Direwolves” and used “the same characters from Martin’s existing books in the series “A Song of Ice and Fire.”

AI is a fantastic tool, but just because it allows the less creative and the less talented to better exploit their imaginations, that doesn’t give anyone the right or the permission to tread upon the legal rights of others.

I’m a strong skeptic of copyright, particularly beyond the life of the author, but the fact is that it exists and while neither a title nor a style can be protected, the characters and existing works are. There really isn’t any difference between a human writing a pastiche – like Scalzi did with Old Man’s War or I did with “The Deported” – and an AI-written text that imitates an author’s style. That is, and should be, permissible.

The problem, of course, is that most people aren’t content with that, and they want to cross the line into the theft of the author’s actual characters and storylines. And if the AI manufacturer’s aren’t preventing their tools from being used in that manner, they are clearly complicit in the violations.

Regardless, AI is going to destroy the popular book market for the vast majority of writers. Because no author can compete with an automated book factories of the sort that AI now permits. In fact, we will probably explore creating one ourselves; some incredible and innovate sagas are going to be produced with these new tools.

Amazon is also limiting authors to three new self-published books on Kindle Direct per day, an effort to restrict the proliferation of AI texts.

DISCUSS ON SG

Not the Worst Idea

Australia contemplates a ban on social media for children under the age of 16:

Australia will ban children from using social media with a minimum age limit as high as 16, the prime minister said Tuesday, vowing to get kids off their devices and ‘onto the footy fields’.

Federal legislation to keep children off social media will be introduced this year, Anthony Albanese said, describing the impact of the sites on young people as a ‘scourge’.

The minimum age for children to log into sites such as Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok has not been decided but is expected to be between 14 and 16 years, Albanese said.

The prime minister said his own preference would be a block on users aged below 16.

Social media can literally be as dangerous as driving for children, as they are far too immature to be dealing with some of the personal issues and challenges that social media can create for them. Also, it will be considerably harder for child predators to groom and lure children away from their homes if they have no electronic access to them.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Evil of Copyright Stands

The Internet Archive lost its appeal in its copyright case against Hachette, HarperCollins, John Wiley and Penguin Random House.

The Internet Archive has lost its appeal in the copyright case against Hachette and three other publishers. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the previous decision, from March 2023, that the Internet Archive’s Open Library program qualifies as copyright infringement. Hachette, HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, and Wiley initially filed a lawsuit against the popular nonprofit organization in 2020.

“This appeal presents the following question: Is it ‘fair use” for a nonprofit organization to scan copyright-protected print books in their entirety, and distribute those digital copies online, in full, for free, subject to a one-to-one owned-to-loaned ratio between its print copies and the digital copies it makes available at any given time, all without authorization from the copyright-holding publishers or authors?” Wednesday’s decision reads. “Applying the relevant provisions of the Copyright Act as well as binding Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedent, we conclude the answer is no.”

The court rejected most of the Internet Archive’s defense, including the notion that the archive provides a public service. “While IA claims that prohibiting its practices would harm consumers and researchers, allowing its practices would―and does―harm authors,” the decision reads. “With each digital book IA disseminates, it deprives Publishers and authors of the revenues due to them as compensation for their unique creations. Though IA and its amici may lament the consolidation of editorial power and criticize Publishers for being motivated by profits, behind Publishers stand authors who are entitled to compensation for the reproduction of their works and whose ‘private motivation’ ultimately serve[s] the cause of promoting broad public availability of literature, music, and the other arts.”

This isn’t going to protect authors. This isn’t going to protect consumers. Like most “law” it does nothing but protect the financial interest of large transnational corporations at the expense of the very works that are being “protected”.

What comes of “copyright protection” is abominations like Amazon’s raping of Tolkien’s work and Disney’s destruction of Star Wars. Meanwhile, most works are lost to the ravages of history, because their “protection” combined with their unprofitability means the corporate copyright holders see no reason to produce or publish them. The fact that the “protection” extends 70 years beyond the life of the author makes it perfectly clear that this isn’t about the preserving the rights of the author to be compensated.

And yes, I have taken steps to ensure that my works, at least, will never be acquired by the usual suspects.

DISCUSS ON SG

Clown World Knows No Law

The reason conservatives can never win or successfully resist Clown World is because they believe that the law is something real, and something material. Whereas, as literally every single lawyer will tell you, what the law actually is not the black letter words passed by the politicians or the policies of the regulatory agencies, it is whatever the judge of the relevant matter says it is.

Justice Alexandre de Moraes of the Supreme Court of Brazil has ordered the operations of X (formerly Twitter) to be “immediately suspended” and threatened draconian fines against anyone trying to sidestep the ban. De Moraes demanded that X censor several accounts that “spread disinformation” by criticizing him, but the platform’s owner Elon Musk refused.

On Friday, the judge ordered the platform banned in Brazil, giving Google and Apple five days to remove X from their app stores. He also threatened a fine of around 50,000 Brazilian real (approximately $8,874) a day for anyone using a virtual private network (VPN) to get around the ban.

On Thursday, de Moraes froze the accounts of Starlink, a subsidiary of Musk’s SpaceX, saying this was needed to ensure the payment of fines levied against X for failing to appoint a legal representative. Musk objected to the “absolutely illegal action” taken without any due process, pointing out that X and SpaceX are “two completely different companies with different shareholders.”

According to X’s Global Government Affairs team, de Moraes “threatened our Brazilian legal representative with imprisonment. Even after she resigned, he froze all of her bank accounts.”

We view this sort of thing as bad. But in Switzerland, the government broke multiple laws to prevent the failure of Credit Suisse from financially harming any of its account holders. Everyone, with the exception of a few shareholders and creditors who ended up getting the short end of the stick, thought this was a very good thing. But whether these things are considered good or bad is irrelevant, the point is that what everyone believes is “the law” is nothing more than a collection of general suggestions that the three branches of government will ignore in a heartbeat whenever they feel that doing so is desirable.

Nothing can be repaired or restored by so-called legal means when the authorities harbor absolutely no respect for what passes for the law. Any policy or distinction that depends upon “legality”, such as immigration or limits on legal speech, doesn’t exist in a practical sense so long as one is government by a government of men, not laws.

Nancy Pelosi just told Bill Maher that she plans to grant citizenship to every illegal immigrant and give them free housing.

See how easy it is to deal with a problem of illegality? One stroke of the pen, one judge’s order, and the problem is magically solved!

DISCUSS ON SG

Defending Freedom in Deutschland

The appeal of the “rights” and “freedoms” being “defended” by the “Democracies” is rapidly vanishing on an almost weekly basis:

The German Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) may soon be allowed to secretly enter and search homes, according to a draft reform proposal seen by Der Spiegel and RND. According to the document, police would also have the power to install spyware on suspects’ computers or smartphones, in addition to conducting covert searches of their homes. These powers would supposedly only be used in exceptional circumstances.

The Interior Ministry has defended the initiative, claiming that the BKA plays a central role in countering international terrorism threats. A spokesperson refused to discuss details of the proposal, which is still at a very early stage, but told Der Spiegel on Wednesday that security agencies must have the necessary powers to effectively counter evolving threats.

Critics have voiced concerns that such far-reaching interventions could undermine the rule of law, as the inviolability of the home is enshrined in Article 13 of the German constitution.

You know, I’m really beginning to suspect that this whole Patriot Act thing may not have actually had as much to do with defending Americans and their rights as we were told it did. Clown World is transforming into a twisted parody of itself.

Vee are here to defend your freedomz by spying on you!

DISCUSS ON SG

If You Think That’s Bad

People are, quite rightly, reacting with disbelief and horror to Disney’s attempt to claim that signing up for a Disney+ subscription means that if you die at one of their restaurants at Disney World due to Disney’s negligence, you have agreed not to sue them.

That doesn’t surprise me, given what corporations have been adding to their Terms of Service. To be honest, I wouldn’t even be remotely surprised if Disney also claims the right to sell the organs of anyone who dies at one of their theme parks, or while watching Disney+.

DISCUSS ON SG

Whatever Happened to Huddled Masses?

The Border Patrol and the FBI denies a German economist entry to the USA:

An economist affiliated with Germany’s conservative Alternative for Germany (AfD) party was detained and interrogated for over 10 hours at a Chicago airport. His phone was seized by authorities allegedly for an offensive meme.

Jurij Christopher Kofner arrived at the Chicago airport on Sunday, July 20, following a 12-hour flight from his hometown of Munich, Bavaria, after which he was immediately detainedby the United States Border Patrol and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Kofner, a self-described “ordoliberal” – a German variant of classical liberalism – was set to attend a weeklong seminar in Springfield, Illinois on “Classical Liberalism and Business” at the University of Illinois, Springfield, organized by the American Institute of Economic Research and the Academy on Capitalism.

Following the conclusion of Kofner’s 10-hour ordeal – during which he noted he was subjected to “random questioning” – he was ultimately refused entry into the United States. Furthermore, his phone was confiscated by authorities for allegedly containing an offending meme. His laptop was also confiscated and subjected to an electronic search, but was later sent back to his home in Munich. His phone remains in U.S. custody “for further analysis.”

The meme in question featured President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as soldiers on D-Day with the caption, in German: “Warmongers in the front row, as it should be.”

Meanwhile, Prince Harry openly confesses to doing illegal drugs and the door is held wide open for him, to say nothing of the tens of millions of migrants whose illegal entry is being facilitated. It’s clear that there hasn’t been any rule of law operative in the States for decades.

DISCUSS ON SG

Educating the Englishman

Richard Dawkins, who is considerably less intelligent than the average individual who has never read one of his books tends to imagine, attempts to criticize the USA’s Constitutional limits on democracy. This is a rather transparent attempt by the hapless evolutionist to avoid criticizing his own kingdom’s even more stringent assaults on democracy, probably because if he did, he would be arrested, imprisoned, and convicted within 48 hours. Devon Eriksen wasted no time in setting Dawkins straight:

Richard Dawkins: Electoral College could deliver presidency to party with 73,000 votes against “losing” party’s 260,000. US Senate election: Single voter in Wyoming wields more influence than 65 Californians. Convicted felon can be President but not superbly qualified US citizen born abroad.

Devon Eriksen: You see, the people who wrote the Constitution understood that a nation is more than just a collection of people. It also consists of all the organizations, processes, institutions, and industries required to actually keep those people alive and have a functional society.

All of these things need political power to defend and advance their interests, allowing them to function.

So, the Constitution itself was designed as a balancing act. Some things are up for a vote, and others are not. And when representation is apportioned, it is not doled out equally by head count.

This is not a bug. It’s a feature. And it’s incredibly wise.

The more technologically advanced a civilization becomes, the fewer actual thinking human people are employed by life-sustaining industries.

That’s a good thing. It is the whole fucking point of technology… free up most of your population from whacking at the dirt with a stick to survive, and they can be engineers, businessmen, tradesmen, entertainers, and artists. People are freed from drudgery, invent cool stuff with all their newfound spare time, and life is better.

But what about those life-sustaining industries? They still have to run. They still need political power in order to make sure the laws protect them, and society sees to their needs. But their work involves very few people, and a lot of machines.

And machines don’t vote.

So it’s not only very important, but gradually more and more important, to the health of your nation that the political will of a cattle rancher in Wyoming carries more weight than that of a fashion magazine editor in San Francisco.

Because fewer and fewer people in your society even understand what is necessary to keep everyone fed.

With the partial exception of Switzerland, the West never had any democracy. In the USA, it is not only limited by the Constitution, but even more strictly by the courts, which make a habit of overturning every referendum that doesn’t please the elite and mostly foreign oligarchy that actually runs the empire masquerading as a “republic”. But both “democracy” and “freedom” are useful rhetorical terms for the imperial propagandists, as they don’t have any substantive meaning that tends to contradict the inverted definitions that are used today.

Dawkins, like most secularists, is orders of magnitude away from understanding anything about the modern world. In rejecting every aspect of the supernatural, he is completely unequipped to make any sense at all between the ancient war between the fallen god of Carthage and the fallen god of Rome, much less the Divine Invasion that is in, but not of that war.

DISCUSS ON SG

SJW Reason

We all know better than to expect logic or consistency out of SJWs. But sometimes, their contorted reasoning is so incredible that simply it has to be appreciated for the gymnastic accomplishment that it is.

Now, keeping in mind that one of my great offenses in the minds of the r/nealgaimanuncovered crowd is that I don’t believe in the concept of “marital rape” – and to be clear, I am in absolute accord with the centuries-long history of legal jurisprudence in rejecting the concept as an intrinsic contradiction in terms – it is somewhat astonishing to see the same people who genuinely believe that a man can rape his legally-married, fully-consenting wife also believe that Neil Gaiman cannot have raped any of his various accusers because he was reportedly in some sort of sexual relationship with them after the fact.

I’m quite willing to listen to the arguments of those who insist that the act of signing a marital contract and undergoing a wedding ceremony is not tantamount to giving permanent and ongoing sexual consent. Those arguments are obviously wrong – try telling the US Army that even though you enlisted and signed the papers, you are refusing to provide active consent to deployment in the Middle East – but they’re not entirely self-contradictory.

But how you can argue that rape exists in marriage despite the obvious evidence of consent having been previously provided, but that having sex with a woman proves you didn’t previously rape her, is simply incoherent nonsense.

DISCUSS ON SG