Feel free to replace the link to point to whatever license you wish to use for your own content, if you do not want to use the same one that I am using.
I don’t think the license does anything at all, but it is weird to me that you are not also including some unique phrase or UUID. How are you going to prove their models used specifically your copyrighted content in the event that courts rule it is not fair use to do so? If you had a unique phrase you could probably trigger the model into repeating it as evidence.
You are writing “anti-commercial AI,” they are making their work explicitly available to republish non-commercially. You have completely different motivations. One major difference between you and ProPublica is they must have interacted with some actual lawyers explaining how copyright works.
Remember I’m pullin’ for ya–we’re all in this together. ✊🏼
Thanks, and no disrespect meant, but I would believe that more if you did license your own comments as well.
In case you need the formatting for it, here it is…
[~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode.en)
Feel free to replace the link to point to whatever license you wish to use for your own content, if you do not want to use the same one that I am using.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
I don’t think the license does anything at all, but it is weird to me that you are not also including some unique phrase or UUID. How are you going to prove their models used specifically your copyrighted content in the event that courts rule it is not fair use to do so? If you had a unique phrase you could probably trigger the model into repeating it as evidence.
ProPublica would disagree with you.
The specific license number is explicitly stated.
Already discussed in that other conversation post.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
You are writing “anti-commercial AI,” they are making their work explicitly available to republish non-commercially. You have completely different motivations. One major difference between you and ProPublica is they must have interacted with some actual lawyers explaining how copyright works.
That’s just a description of what the license actually does, non-commercial usage of my content.
It’s actually not even my description, it’s one I got from someone else, who’s also licensing their content with the same license.
I have no problem with my content being used for non-commercial purposes.
No, I do not. My intent aligns with ProPublica.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
“Your license doesn’t do what you say it does.”
“Haha, joke’s on you, I don’t want it to do what I say it does.”
Glad we figured that one out.
Whatever lets you sleep at night.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)