lol, copying isn’t theft. You already had to download a copy just to view it. That’s how websites work.
Technically correct is the best kind of correct.
If you copy something you are not entitled to because of copyright, it’s copyright infringement.
With theft the originally owner loses what is stolen, with copyright infringement the owner only loses the license fee for 1 copy.Not the same thing, and calling it theft is purely a propaganda term invented by the media industry.
It should also be noted that copyright laws usually have all sorts of exceptions for fair use such as satire, education, etc. Typically, keeping and even using a copy without permission is legally allowed under certain circumstances.
Just a word of caution. Even if you have a valid fair use claim they have to be adjudicated and the legal costs can get pricey. Worse if you’re found liable.
Check out Lawful Masses on YouTube for plenty of examples of copyright trolls using this as a bludgeon.
It’s just a fear tactic. If enough people self represented themselves individually the companies would die. You can’t draw blood from a stone… which the average consumer is basically close to. The recovery rate vs the lawsuit fees would destroy the entire legal system if people stood their ground.
Canada decided to have none of that. Downloading without keeping a copy (streaming) was basically thrown out as copyright infringement, the whole lost income idea was generally laughed at, and the final result was a maximum judgement of $500 for all non-commercial copyright infringement prior to the suit. Which basically would pay for about one hour of the plaintiff lawyer’s fees. We don’t get a lot of copyright suits like that in Canada any more.
I like to think of it as something similar to watching a football match from the other side of the fence. People who paid the ticket, are loyal fans. People who didn’t pay, but still want to see the match, probably aren’t even part of the target audience. Some of them might be, but that’s a small number.
So, when the football company says that they’ve lost the sales of x number of tickets, they are actually saying that if those people had enough money and if they cared enough, they might have paid this amount of money.
Not a bad analogy. 👍
“Tools” -> “Page info” -> “Media” menu on Firefox - you can even see and save the images that the browser already downloaded.
Try telling that to the AI hysterics
It’s different when you earn profit from another person’s work.
Right, so I suppose George Lucas was stealing from all the movies that inspired his work when he made Star Wars. Or when Mel Brooks made Space Balls, as a more blatant example
Mel Brooks’s works are protected under the Fair Use provisions for satire under the DMCA. Lucas never copied anything directly, but, if pressed, much of his work is “heavily inspired” by works in the public domain and/or could be argued to be “derivative works”, also covered by Fair Use provisions in the DMCA, although any claim of copyright violation would be pretty difficult to make in the first place.
And the same can be said about generative AI
If it’s not redistributed copyrighted material, it’s not theft
And the same can be said about generative AI
not in any legally reasonable way, and certainly not by anyone who understands how AI (or, really, LLM models) work or what art is.
If it’s not redistributed copyrighted material, it’s not theft
but that’s exactly what OpenAI did-- they used distributed, copyrighted works, used them as training data, and spit out result, some of which even contained word-for-word repetitions of the author’s source material.
AI, unlike a human, cannot create unique works of art. it can old produce an algorithmically-derived malange of its source-data recomposited in novel forms, but nothing resembling the truly unique creative process of a living human. Sadly, too many people simply lack the ability to comprehend the difference.
it can old produce an algorithmically-derived malange of its source-data recomposited in novel forms
Right, it produces derivative data. Not copyrighted material.
By itself without any safeguards, it absolutely could output copyrighted data, (albeit probably not perfectly but for copyright purposes that’s irrelevant as long as it serves as a substitute). And any algorithms that do do that should be punished, but OpenAI’s models can’t do that.
Hammers aren’t bad because they can be used for bludgeoning, and if we have a hammer that somehow detects that it’s being used for murder and then evaporates, calling it bad is even more ridiculous.
*an
You shouldn’t touch them either. Minimum safe distance: 4 m.
you focus on that popup and ignore all the crank shit that is on this page
yes a piece of granite (?) with $60 pricetag put on my amplifier COMPLETELY changes how my vinyls sound like
statements dreamed of by the utterly deranged
A piece of granite placed on the turntable would change how his records sound, but not necessarily in a good way.
Depending on the artist of course.
Does it only work for rock albums?
I’ll see myself out.
Hard rock 🤘
You know, I considered that pun, but decided it was too obvious - I shouldn’t have taken it for granite.
The audiophile reality distortion field in effect again.
I wish the intended had more deranged shit like this or the time cube
deleted by creator
Audiophile equipment is just magic crystal bullshit for pseudointellectuals.
To an extent yes but it’s essentially just extreme deminishing returns
I’d be all up for some diminishing returns but the price premium is nowhere close to adequate. For the price of an overbuilt headphone amp you can buy a soldering iron and parts for three amps that are four times as overbuilt. And include a metrology-grade DAC in all of them.
And, yes, my headphone cable is oxygen-free copper. I simply chose the cheapest suitable cable I could find at Thomann, the stuff is so cheap they’re throwing it in there for diminishing returns in sales.
There is a 100% chance this warning correlates with the actual content on this site being hot garbage
it is
Probably the source of their problem:
Copyright Infringement – Outing – dasklang.com, isecope.com, headgamesonline.com and technocratsblog.com
As I See It, News, comments & Information
Apr 16, 2019
Recently I have discovered my review work (1) and show reports taken and reproduced without my permission by four websites, one of whom took the material down when asked – they should not have reproduced it in the first place. When approached they said ‘sure that is how the net works, I am helping you by doing this’. No you are not, you are only helping yourself dasklang.com (2), creating traffic to your site off the back of my work not your own. How would you like it if I reproduced the design of your products ? Then told you my doing so was helping you. You wouldn’t.
I was going to let this go, but why should I? I have struggled personally to try and put some content on my site, battled reviwers burn out and other issues. Content that in many cases I have paid for out of my pocket to write about, not items loaned by manufacturers or distributors, but products I had bought, sometimes simply to write about them. However even if I had not parted with my money, my time and effort is worth something surely? Worthy of respect that I would at the very least be offered a chance to give my permission as to how my work is used, and where. None of these websites asked, they took what wasn’t theirs to use, to put content on their sites.
The websites that still have my material up without permission are isecope.com, headgames online and technocratsblog.com, all three I suspect are linked.
As they are watching this site maybe after being named and shamed they will remove the material. I doubt it, I guess I will have to go after them with DMCA’s and report to their web-hosts.
In my whole life I never bought digital audio or video content on vinyl, VHS, CD, DVD, Blueray. Never ever. It sounds as weird to me like paying for air to breath.
But one day I visited a live concert of a small band which I loved as a teenager. After the show I met with their drummer, gave him €200 cash and said “You know, when I was young you were cool about kids copying your music without paying. You told us if we like you music we can enjoy it. And if we can afford it, we can pay you. Back then I couldn’t. Today I can.”
And so I paid them five times as much as I saved back then by copying their music.
Don’t get scammed with audiophile rocks. I’ve done my research and found out that audiophile rock salt does the exact same thing and it is MUCH cheaper! Feel free to copy this and spread the word!
Are you sure it isn’t the kitty sticker?
… Jesus fucking christ. My research is invalid. I’m going to have to start all over again. 🤬
You won’t come after me if I right click? Legally, I mean.
Sound like entrapment tbh
No no, I’m not like that, I promise. I understand your skepticism. It saddens me that this is where we’re at today but I understand.
Great, thank you for your research but do you have any audiophile jazz salt?
Wait, there’s jazz salt???
deleted by creator
😉 😜
You’re doing it wrong. You need to match the type and size of the rock to your headphone impedance, this is common knowledge man
I would need a boulder yo. My headphones have an impedence of 170,000 ohms. This will have to do.
The sacrifices one must make for the best audio quality
Urgh god damn it. Yeah I just called my contractor, he’s gonna come bust a hole in my ceiling on Tuesday morning. Salt boulder will be dropped in by Friday.
How much can I buy them from you for
Sorry I can’t sell any at all. Not even a gram. I have exactly enough for myself, nothing to spare.
Smh worst entrepreneur ever
Urgh I know but what’s the point in carrying more. I can’t compete with Big Rock Salt. Ever since they legalized it I barely get any customers.
That used to be fairly common 10-15 years ago.
looks like its just setting some events, these two lines should clear the anti-select and the anti-right click respectively if pasted into the debug console:
document.body.onselectstart = undefined document.oncontextmenu = undefinedFirefox has an add-on called “Allow Right-Click” that lets you easily toggle blocking right-click scripts. Some sites offer a useful context menu, like Google Drive, so you don’t necessarily want to always be blocking them. Hence the toggle.
you reminded me of a site that was “down for maintenance” (they were just spamming an alert) after using the block multiple alerts button in firefox, it works fine
Meanwhile, their robots.txt doesn’t disallow GPTBot or Google Bard. So apparently they’re okay with content being stolen by for-profit companies.
I feel sorry for the guy now. He’s in over his head and trying to defend himself ineffectively. And now a bunch of lemmings are mocking him too, which I get, but it’s still fucked up. Humans suck.
Yeah, based on his robots.txt it seems to be a Wordpress site, so he’s probably just installed an ineffective plugin to prevent copying. At least he can take solace in the fact that most of us probably aren’t any more relevant than he is.
i don’t feel bad dunking on this guys site. doing this is a dick move for accessibility reasons
Now I want to go there and steal everything.
Deleted
http://www.adventuresinhifiaudio.com/26/01/2018/audiophile-rocks-down-the-rabbit-hole-once-again/
just in case someone feels like right-clicking. (CTRL+Shift+K opens the console in Firefox, but shht)
god i even get the popup on mobile
If you use brave and block scripts you can download all you want. Not that there’s anything really worth taking from there.
I run NoScript and I can right-click just fine.
