#DMCA Subpoenas Can’t Be Used for Foreign #Piracy Lawsuits, Court Rules - https://torrentfreak.com/dmca-subpoenas-cant-be-used-for-foreign-piracy-lawsuits-court-rules/ #copyright interesting ruling

#DMCA Subpoenas Can’t Be Used for Foreign #Piracy Lawsuits, Court Rules - https://torrentfreak.com/dmca-subpoenas-cant-be-used-for-foreign-piracy-lawsuits-court-rules/ #copyright interesting ruling

Bravo to the Spanish Supreme Court for its Sept 2025 decision establishing four important principles: "[1] Access to source code can be needed to verify automated government decisions;
[2] “Intellectual property rights” do not automatically block transparency; [3] Security concerns must be balanced against democratic accountability; and [4] Transparency is especially critical for systems affecting social rights."
https://civio.app.box.com/s/2gcrxy4mkpzg49yqkmuaj9z7c44jl7ta

h/t #FSFE (@fsfe) for this article about it.
https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260205-01.html

#Code #Copyright #IP #Law #OpenSource #Spain

Question on #copyright I intend to publish a public domain book, Myths and Legends of the Bantu. I think it's an important documentation of our cultures, but it has problematic and racist content. So my goal is to strip it of racism, fix some factual errors, etc. I can't claim authorship, original author has moral rights to that. I'll only claim editorship. But 1) Can I legally register a copyright to this edition? 2) Is this whitewashing the author of her racism?

#writing #writingcommunity

Question on #copyright I intend to publish a public domain book, Myths and Legends of the Bantu. I think it's an important documentation of our cultures, but it has problematic and racist content. So my goal is to strip it of racism, fix some factual errors, etc. I can't claim authorship, original author has moral rights to that. I'll only claim editorship. But 1) Can I legally register a copyright to this edition? 2) Is this whitewashing the author of her racism?

#writing #writingcommunity

Bravo to the Spanish Supreme Court for its Sept 2025 decision establishing four important principles: "[1] Access to source code can be needed to verify automated government decisions;
[2] “Intellectual property rights” do not automatically block transparency; [3] Security concerns must be balanced against democratic accountability; and [4] Transparency is especially critical for systems affecting social rights."
https://civio.app.box.com/s/2gcrxy4mkpzg49yqkmuaj9z7c44jl7ta

h/t #FSFE (@fsfe) for this article about it.
https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260205-01.html

#Code #Copyright #IP #Law #OpenSource #Spain

@juergen_hubert@mementomori.social
> ...so by the same standards, US companies aren't violating my privacy rights unless they are convicted in an US court?
That's not what I said and I'm sure you know that.

Does US Law and the Constitution apply in Countries other than the US?

I mean, look, I may be guilty of violating the UK's Terrorism Act if I write, "I support Palestine Action and the fundamental rights of all Palestinians. Free Gaza! Free Palestine! From the river to the sea Palestine will be free!"

> The UK government proscribed Palestine Action as a terrorist organization under the Terrorism Act 2000 in July 2025, making it a crime to be a member or express support, punishable by up to 14 years in prison.

But those same words are protected speech by the US Constitution. Since I am a US Citizen, on US soil, I can say whatever the fuck I want about Israel or the UK Government. Fuck Israel and fuck Yvette Cooper and Kier Starmer. Actually, fuck King Charles, too, for marrying Diana when he didn't love her, and treating Harry like shit.

But I'm sure if the UK Government wanted to, they could put out a warrant for my arrest. But I'd have a pretty good chance to quash it because of the First Amendment.

The UK has a different legal and justice system than the US, and has no Freedom of Speech. "Proscription" is blatantly Unconstitutional in the US. It's not in the UK.

So geography definitely matters, and while other Countries have the concept of innocent until proven guilty, no other countries are as absolute in that than the US.

> I am a self-published author.

So am I.

> I have released a very large portion of my work under a #CreativeCommons Zero license. I am generally in favor of the free flow of information.

All of my works are released under CC-BY-SA, even the one's I sell at Amazon. I respect your CC0 decision.

> But I still wouldn't want others to freely share my work in its entirety - that is, including the parts for which I retain #copyright - without my consent.

Have you read the CC0 license? If you don't want others to freely share your works you need to license your works under a different license.

> Even if our legal perspectives differ - do you agree that consent matters?

Not when it comes to works I've created and have made the conscious decision to let others use my work freely, no. Sorry.

@gme

...so by the same standards, US companies aren't violating my privacy rights unless they are convicted in an US court?

Okay, sure, whatever. If that's your understanding of the legal part of what they did, then you do you.

So let me tackle this from another perspective.

I am a self-published author.

I have released a very large portion of my work under a #CreativeCommons Zero license. I am generally in favor of the free flow of information.

But I still wouldn't want others to freely share my work in its entirety - that is, including the parts for which I retain #copyright - without my consent.

Even if our legal perspectives differ - do you agree that consent matters?

@Thriveth @pluralistic @eosfpodcast
"The fact that every AI-created work is in the public domain means that if Getty or Disney or Universal or Hearst newspapers use AI to generate works – then anyone else can take those works, copy them, sell them or give them away for nothing. And the only thing those companies hate more than paying creative workers, is having other people take their stuff without permission."
#copyright #AI

@Thriveth @pluralistic @eosfpodcast
"The fact that every AI-created work is in the public domain means that if Getty or Disney or Universal or Hearst newspapers use AI to generate works – then anyone else can take those works, copy them, sell them or give them away for nothing. And the only thing those companies hate more than paying creative workers, is having other people take their stuff without permission."
#copyright #AI

Department of Justice Urges Supreme Court Not to Hear AI Image Authorship Case https://petapixel.com/2026/02/02/department-of-justice-urges-supreme-court-not-to-hear-ai-image-authorship-case/ #artificialintelligence #drstephenthaler #Technology #copyright #thaler #News #Law #doj

Department of Justice Urges Supreme Court Not to Hear AI Image Authorship Case https://petapixel.com/2026/02/02/department-of-justice-urges-supreme-court-not-to-hear-ai-image-authorship-case/ #artificialintelligence #drstephenthaler #Technology #copyright #thaler #News #Law #doj

Excellent article by Bruce Schneier " #AI and the Corporate Capture of Knowledge".

"The question is not simply whether #copyright law applies to AI. It is why the law appears to operate so differently depending on who is doing the extracting and for what purpose."

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2026/01/ai-and-the-corporate-capture-of-knowledge.html

Excellent article by Bruce Schneier " #AI and the Corporate Capture of Knowledge".

"The question is not simply whether #copyright law applies to AI. It is why the law appears to operate so differently depending on who is doing the extracting and for what purpose."

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2026/01/ai-and-the-corporate-capture-of-knowledge.html

One simple change to copyright law that would make a huge difference is making exclusive licenses unenforceable. Here's an example.

After decades of consolidation, an oligopoly of 3 corporations control licensing for the majority of the world's recorded music (Universal, Sony and Warner). If an artist wants their music distributed by one of them, they have to sign over 100% control of their music licensing rights.

(1/?)

#PolicyNZ #copyright #CopyrightReform

"#News #publishers limit #InternetArchive access due to #AI scraping concerns."
https://www.niemanlab.org/2026/01/news-publishers-limit-internet-archive-access-due-to-ai-scraping-concerns/

PS: I'm one who thinks AI training on copyrighted content is #FairUse and (separate point) even desirable in the case of academic research.
https://fediscience.org/@petersuber/113443473594224752

But this kind of training will create huge collateral damage --indirectly through publisher action -- if it diminishes the @internetarchive.

#Copyright #Journalism

"Incredibly enough, there is a really simple way to [protect artists from #AIpredation]…

The #CopyrightOffice has maintained—correctly—that #AIgenerated works cannot be copyrighted… That is why the “monkey selfie” is in the #publicdomain. #Copyright is only awarded to works of human creative expression that are fixed in a tangible medium.

…they have defended this principle vigorously in court, repeatedly winning judgments to uphold it." @pluralistic

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/jan/18/tech-ai-bubble-burst-reverse-centaur