@EUCommission I filled in the form. It wasn't easy. For many of us the English is too complex. You should offer more languages and a plain English version. Otherwise, there is a lot of hasitation and fear to accidentally choose the wrong answers.

@EUCommission If AI gets the material for free, all courts which convicted a person for "piracy" and "copyright infridgement" should not only grant amnesty to all convicted but also pay the culprits lost renevue, mental damage compensation, etc.

Also future "copyright" cases would then be invalid since you would grant AI more rights than a human being.

@EUCommission
As a writer I wan't to be paid.
If they give me an income on a regular base they can use my texts. If not, not. It is as easy as that. And it's fair because they want to make profit on a regular base.

@EUCommission I'm sorry, I was going to answer this survey in good faith, but your opening paragraph tells me that you're not asking it in good faith.

@EUCommission Hmm, none? Weird question honestly.

@EUCommission oft course you don't want input from software developers. Because stealing from us is OK.
Please, please, please let AI detect you as the danger that you are, so that it can find and execute a solution.

@EUCommission

you already know the correct and only answer.

permission is permission.
right of ownership is right of ownership.
unlawful copying is unlawful copying.
and actions have consequences.

that is the full scope of pertinent information.

therefore if IP is unlawfully copied then the consequences for that apply.

@EUCommission

@EUCommission When that content is paid for by LLM companies is the only correct answer.

@EUCommission I'm not an EU citizen. I may qualify for citizenship in two separate countries because of my ancestry that are member states, I'm a resident seeking citizenship in a country that may soon be an "associate" member, but as it stands, I am not an EU citizen.

I hope you won't dismiss what I'm about to say based on that, but I expect you will at least prioritise the feedback of citizens.

My gut reaction to this was, "Never?" This felt unreasonable given copyright does not forbid access, it just mandates consent of the holder.

Then I thought about why that was my gut reaction and came to the same conclusion.

Not because I think copyright should forbid anyone, I disagree with a lot of how copyright works today. I think the answer is never because they have already stolen countless copyrighted works to train the models already used today. Court cases in multiple jurisdictions have already documented this. They did so mostly using websites explicitly designed to circumvent copyright where using such websites is illegal in most jurisdictions on the planet.

The answer is never because they should be paying exorbitant fines if they aren't already in prison for the breach of copyright they have already committed en masse.

@EUCommission #LLM models should never be trained on content without consent of the copyright holder because otherwise, as already admitted by insiders, this amounts to theft on an unimaginable scale. Not seen since the slave trade and enclosures of common land.

That you are consulting about this is a disgrace and looks like another lobbying driven shifty scam which has become the norm in the EU and elsewhere. Paid lobbying is power for the wealthy and has no place in a democracy.

@EUCommission I will submit a feedback form later but I'm super puzzled why this is even a question at all?

AI companies are not special. They are just like any other for-profit software company, so copyright law applies to them just like it does for everyone else.

@EUCommission I am halfway through the first page of your survey and basically every question assumes that I am okay with AI having more rights than humans. I AM NOT.

This way, your results will be basically useless and just confirm your initial bias.

It’s fine to reply here but fill out this form if you want to have any impact. https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/targetedconsultationcopyright

@EUCommission I did my best to fill out the the questionnaire, but it is almost unreadable if you're not a lawyer and from what I did understand it seems very biased. I can't shake the impression that you seem to want to facilitate the whims of corporations instead of serving the interests of the people.

Because why is copyright suddenly an issue when is doesn't suit corporations anymore? Just apply and enforce the same laws that are used to prosecute or fine citizens that torrented a movie.