Something I think *must* be the case is that the studios have strategically given up on making sure their DMCA notices seem reasonable
-
-
En réponse à @sarahjeong
This, of course, goes as far as targeting entirely unrelated works, which is undisputedly a misrepresentation, regardless of fair use
1 réponse 1 Retweet 2 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
By sticking to the Rossi subjective belief req, it's becomes *really* hard to show that something that's painfully obvious to the layperson
1 réponse 1 Retweet 2 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
When a list of "infringing" URLs includes 127.0.0.1, do you still have to ask a jury whether a proper subjective belief was formed?
2 réponses 2 Retweets 13 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
@sarahjeong So does the judicial system just have a epistemological problem around the hand off between humans and machines?1 réponse 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @knowtheory
@sarahjeong Are there parallels re robo-signing on foreclosures that make these a similar kind of problem?2 réponses 0 Retweet 2 j'aime -
En réponse à @knowtheory
@knowtheory Well, someone has to sign the document and there's a bit about "on penalty of perjury" but it only applies to one bit and...2 réponses 0 Retweet 1 j'aime -
En réponse à @sarahjeong
@sarahjeong it just seems very wizard of oz. Signatory probably won't have knowledge of robot's policy/algorithms. Robots can't sign.1 réponse 0 Retweet 2 j'aime -
En réponse à @knowtheory
@sarahjeong System designers remain behind curtain.1 réponse 0 Retweet 2 j'aime
@knowtheory Yeah, and the example given in the Lenz decision is an extremely blunt (though limited!) algorithm.
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.