this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2025
648 points (96.7% liked)

Technology

68813 readers
6050 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter (now X) and Square (now Block), sparked a weekend’s worth of debate around intellectual property, patents, and copyright, with a characteristically terse post declaring, “delete all IP law.”

X’s current owner Elon Musk quickly replied, “I agree.”

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] randomname@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This is the only thing he's ever done or said that I agree with, even though his real intentions are obvious. We really do need a complete re-writing of IP law, but not from Elon.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] maplebar@lemmy.world 46 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

It's not a surprise that all these techbros who want to steal everything and feed it into their AI machines without paying a single fucking cent to the original creators all the sudden want to get rid of IP. They can lead by example by submitting their IP into the public domain.

Or maybe they're just massive frauds?

[–] StJohnMcCrae@slrpnk.net 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

This is of course after they spent decades consolidating power, wealth and influence with those same IP laws, while snuffing out all smaller competitors.

The speed with which Americas tech CEOs have embraced this new oligarchic system is astounding. It's almost like that was the plan all along. Almost.

[–] mhague@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Well a billionaire commanded we argue about copyright law. I guess we need to expend our energy and build enough momentum so that Musk can grab more power during the turmoil.

Trumpers did their part by arguing about free speech. Time to tap into our issues with IP laws and help Musk too!

[–] neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 3 days ago

I think ip laws are important but need to be changed. One example are things that are funded by tax dollars. They can’t own the ip of something we funded even if partially funded. Maybe let them hold the ip until they recoup their cost.

I also think that it is OK for companies to have ip, but it needs to be shorter. Like, they get 10 years or they earn 10x their cost on developing it.

Im not saying my exact ideas are perfect, but just an example of how ip should not last for as long as it does.

[–] athairmor@lemmy.world 63 points 3 days ago (8 children)

This isn’t as forward thinking as you’d want it to be.

For as much as they are abused, “IP laws” protect small and individual inventors, writers, composers, etc.

With no patent, copyright or trademark protections the billionaires will own or bury everything.

What is needed is to bring the laws back to their intended purpose.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 25 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

Fundamentally it should be an attribution and reward system, whereas currently it's a false scarcity system.

Everyone should be able to use everything, but you should be required to attribute your source material. If you do, the song / work etc should get an extra licensing fee per play. That way you're always encouraged to provide attribution since you don't lose money from it, and wholly original works will be cheaper and thus more desirable.

Not dissimilar to how song sampling works today but without all the manual negotiation for every license.

And if you fail to provide attribution you get hit with appropriate penalties.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] theblips@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago

Can't disagree here, this would be great

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Wow. A white guy with money has an opinion. This is getting crazy! /s

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 34 points 3 days ago

The current US trade war is the perfect opportunity for some other country or countries to "right-size" their IP laws.

Hollywood wanted "lifetime plus 900 years" or whatever. So, whenever the US negotiated a trade deal it said "you only get tariff-free access to our markets if you give Hollywood lifetime plus 900 years in your country too."

With section 1201 of the DMCA this also meant that other countries had to accept that you could only repair your John Deere tractor if you paid Deere for the privilege. Or that HP could prevent you from using any ink but theirs in your printer, allowing them to make printer ink the most expensive liquid on the planet.

If the US is no longer abiding by the terms of their trade agreements, other countries should no longer honor these absurd IP treaties.

[–] dzso@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago

Musk is out to delete all laws that don't benefit him, and replace them with harsh private rules that are not accountable to the people.

[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 39 points 3 days ago (10 children)

I’m cool with it. I think we should require almost everything to be public domain. But I think those personally contributing to the public domain should be recognized, and no one should be allowed to get rich off of it.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

You're cool with it until you realize that they only want to do this to personally gain from it. And guaranteed will protect their own IP, and the IP of every large corporation.

It's just that you yourself and small businesses will no longer have the benefit of intellectual property. Megacorps can steal whatever they want with impunity since they are the only true holders of intellectual property.

That sounds good on paper until you look at the long history of these people and how everything they do is entirely focused on their own benefit over that of others. They gain something to win here, guaranteed they aren't going to let themselves lose on anything either.

It's the same sort of situation as AI regulation. Sam Altman and openai want the United States to crack down and make it extremely difficult to develop new models. Why? So that they don't have any competition. They already got their foot in the door they want to close the door for anyone else.

This is very likely the same sort of situation.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] gargolito@lemm.ee 35 points 3 days ago (4 children)

The libertarians want everything for free. Interesting.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago (1 children)

And the second they get it, they reinvent IP law, but in an even more restricted form.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 31 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Dorsey got fired from his own company by the board for incompetence.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NostraDavid@programming.dev 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Geobloke@lemm.ee 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 3 days ago
[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 15 points 3 days ago

Now that it interferes with me I'm against it. As soon as it's absence causes me any grief I'll be for it again.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

These people are threats to our actual lives.

[–] alphahowler@lemm.ee 10 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Avoiding tax loopholes and fair taxation for billionnaires could also be considered. Just saying. Otherwise I think that the idea of deleting all IP laws is just wishful (and naive) thinking, assuming people would cooperate and build on each other’s inventions/creations.

Given the state the world is currently in, I don’t see that happening soon.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Tetragrade@leminal.space 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Capital finally taking the market out behind the barn.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] qaz@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago (1 children)

A real nuisance for all those AI datasets, huh?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 9 points 3 days ago (5 children)

Hard yes. Glad to see there's at least one thing we are aligned on.

[–] twice_hatch@midwest.social 20 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Nah copyright is useful for free software. Patents, we could probably live without patents

Trademark is also useful. I don't want Tyson making fake vegan hot dogs

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›