104
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 weeks ago

Ultimately, Judge William Alsup ruled that this destructive scanning operation qualified as fair use—but only because Anthropic had legally purchased the books first, destroyed each print copy after scanning, and kept the digital files internally rather than distributing them. The judge compared the process to "conserv[ing] space" through format conversion and found it transformative.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

It's literally the process that allows digitized media to be safe to possess. Someone read the FBI warnings before movies on VHS. This is some corporate malicious compliance and what the law looks like when taken to an absurd extreme.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago

Phrased like it's a technicality, when it's just... your rights. You are explicitly allowed to do this.

This whole article sounds like Jack Valenti shrieking over VCRs. 'They copied a broadcast! For later!!! That's skirting copyright law!'

Copyright law suuucks. It needs vicious reform. And yet! These specific things have always been permitted, as a necessary part of protecting consumers, versus an industry that would love to charge rent for the books on your shelf. Those motherfuckers put DRM in cables. And yet: their laws say this is fine.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

It's not that clear cut. Buying a book doesn't generallly give you the right to make copies and sell those.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

Is that what they did?

Is that what anyone's talking about?

this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
104 points (97.3% liked)

Not the Onion

2774 readers
94 users here now

For true stories that are so ridiculous, that you could have sworn it was an !theonion worthy story.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS