[wswope]

> People always say this like the tech industry wasn't culturally anti-copyright and pro-creative commons before.

I completely agree with that. The problem is that the current system is such that only billion dollar players can flout the rules, while everyone else is left in the dust.

Worst of both worlds IMO.

[dmix]

Others already mentioned they lost their lawsuit. Should the fines have killed Anthropic? Would have been more fair and a less bad world?

Why not focus energy on being anti-aggressive copyright in general. These system won't ever be fair. It's just rent seeking enabled by the government and some people can afford the rent.

[wswope]

You’re talking past me for no real reason, mate. That’s precisely the point I’m making.

Young Carlos thinks it matters that Anthropic got sued when they can keep flouting the rules anyway, and I disagree: it’s not a fair system until we ditch the rent-seeking entirely.

[carlosjobim]

To pick a nit: Technically Anthropic didn't loose any lawsuit or pay any fine. They came to an agreement with the authors to pay them a $1,5 billion settlement. Which was a lot of money per book.