Most instances don’t have a specific copyright in their ToS, which is basically how copyright is handled on corporate social media (Meta/X/Reddit owns license rights to whatever you post on their platform when you click “Agree”). I’ve noticed some people including Copyright notices in posts (mostly to prevent AI use). Is this necessary, or is the creator the automatic copyright owner? Does adding the copyright/license information do anything?
Please note if you have legal credentials in your reply. (I’m in the USA, but I’d be interested to hear about other jurisdictions if there are differences)
It’s crazy to me that anyone thinks it does anything. How can someone who cares enough about AI not know the controversies about OpenAI’s training data?
The people and organizations building LLMs do not give a fuck if you add that garbage to your comment or not.
Also, good luck to those people if they have to prove an AI was trained with their comment
The biggest time would be it would start to include that link at the end of every comment.
Does that mean creative commons doesn’t really mean anything? I have my website cc by sa, thinking or changing it to cc by sa no cc but I feel like companies would still take my stuff from my website.
They can’t take stuff from your website because piracy isn’t stealing.
Not sure but at the very least it’s way less annoying to see it on a website than it is under every comment
You’re free to block those that use the license, if you find it annoying to see.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
You’re free to reply to a week-old comment, too, but neither is a great idea
Sometimes its just about making a point, even if you stumble upon something later on. 🤷
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
What is that point?
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
The point you felt was worth making a week later is that I am free to block someone who does something I find kind of annoying?
That seems a little extreme to me. Why would you encourage that?
You (in certain cases your employer) own the copyright to your creations. It’s your intellectual property. By adding a license, you give others permission to use your property. That’s just good old capitalism.
Your property rights aren’t without limit, though. What exactly those are depends on jurisdiction, but you probably can’t stop others from archiving your site for their own purposes.
Depends on what your goal is. Strictly speaking cc by sa is more permissive than putting no copyright notice at all, since copyright is automatic, and the cc licenses grant various permissions not contained in standard copyright. It’s just a fancy legalistic way of saying “please credit me off you use this, continue to share in a similar fashion, but not for any commercial purpose”.
So if you want people to share your work, cc by sa makes sense.