Hacker News Reader

Comment by pc86 | Hacker News Reader

> Isn't data just data?

No. At the risk of just repeating the comment you didn't understand, creative works are not "just data" - they are copyrightable works that the owner has control over who can use them, not just for profit, but for any reason with few exceptions.

You don't just get to drop someone else's work product into your algorithm without their permission.

View on HN

There are cases where "dropping into your algorithm" would count as fair use such as a search engine of copyrighted content.

> You don't just get to drop someone else's work product into your algorithm without their permission.

Why not?

Because copyright law exists.

I don't think using data as input to an algorithm necessarily breaks copyright law.

I can read a book to post my impression on it somewhere right? I can read it and say "it was beautiful" on twitter.

I can then automate my "taste meter" through machine learning, it reads a given book character by character, and spits out what I'd think of it if I actually read it. Then posts it on twitter, says "it was beautiful".

Did I break copyright law? I don't think so.

You can't take something copyrighted by someone else and re-distribute it without their permission. However, I suspect you can capture it freely if you don't re-distribute it.

I think the fashion industry should exert their right to have their work removed from photographs.

Neat straw man but you're actually proving my point. There are scenarios under which they can't do that (fair use) but there are also many scenarios where they would be entirely within their right to do so.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com