It's meaningless bullshit if they think the AI companies give a shit about copyright

Even moreso: When you post online you typically give the website a license to distribute the content in the terms and conditions. That's all the license they need, it doesn't matter what you say in the comments.

Because people don't understand how copyright works.

In most countries any copyrightable work that you produce is automatically covered by copyright. You don't need to do anything additional to gain that protection.

Most Lemmy instances don't have any sort of licensing grant in their terms of service. So that means that the original author maintains all ownership of their work.

So technically what these people are doing is granting a license to their comment that allows it to be used for more than would otherwise be allowed by the default copyright protections.

What they are probably trying to accomplish is to revoke the ability for commercial enterprises to use their comments. However that is already the default state so it is pretty irrelevant. Basically any company that cares about copyright and thinks that what they are doing isn't allowed as fair use already wouldn't be able to use their comments without the license note. So by adding the license note all they are doing is allowing non-commercial AI to scrape it (which is probably not what was intended). Of course most AI scraping companies don't care about copyright or think that their use is not protected under copyright. So it is again irrelevant.

It's the internet equivalent of a sovereign citizen putting a fake license plate on their car.

The ones they're trying to "protect themselves" from do not give a shit.

Remember when all those boomers were making Facebook posts about how they don't consent to Facebook doing the things in their terms and conditions?

2 bucks says commercial ai is still being trained on those comments.

@onlinepersona@programming.dev and @CosmicCleric@lemmy.world should be able to give their perspectives.

It's a fundamental misunderstanding of how you automatically have copyright on any written work you produce, and how it's unclear whether any sort of licensing even applies to training data in the US.

Check if you actually saw multiple people or if it was always just a single user called internetpersona. They are the only one I saw doing that but are quite active here, so you might get a wrong impression. Imo this is completely useless.

I dislike it but merely because it normalizes having to sign content with an anti commercialization license to refuse to have your data harvested. Contributing to AI should be opt-in.