[HN Gopher] Who Owns Einstein?
___________________________________________________________________
Who Owns Einstein?
Author : klelatti
Score : 16 points
Date : 2022-05-18 15:06 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| bitwize wrote:
| I saw a note on Salesforce's Web training site to the effect of
| "ALBERT EINSTEIN used under license from the Hebrew University of
| Jerusalem." And there on the main page was a little Alegria
| Albert, dancing with the Alegria people and Salesforce's
| nonbinary spaceperson mascot, advertising the company's
| Einstein(tm) AI service.
|
| All of this strikes me as tacky and twee. Were the real Albert
| alive today, he would not want something as stupid as a
| statistical classifier running on a computer to wear his name as
| a badge of "intelligence". What is the difference between a
| cheesy marketing campaign like this, and the tacky associations
| the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's legal team purports to
| avoid?
|
| Answer: Salesforce has money, and the licensing fees would make a
| nice little addition to the university's endowment.
| mindcrime wrote:
| "Posthumous publicity rights" has to be one of the dumbest ideas
| I've ever heard of in my life. Copyright lasting 70 years after
| the death of the artist/creator is bad enough, but this is
| ridiculous.
| qiskit wrote:
| At this point, we would be better off without any copyrights
| laws. It's no longer about protecting the interests of artists,
| creators, etc. It's about protecting the interests of
| corporations and the useless privileged elites to the detriment
| of society as a whole.
| mindcrime wrote:
| I have to admit, I'm torn on whether or not we should have
| copyright / patent / etc. laws or not (and what their exact
| nature should be if so).
|
| But I do feel pretty strongly that IF we have those things,
| the time spans should be severely limited. I don't think I
| personally, for example, would support copyright for _any_
| duration beyond the life of the author / creator.
| mikebenfield wrote:
| I disagree. If copyright exists, its term shouldn't be tied
| to anyone's life at all.
|
| Let's say I produce a copyrighted work, and immediately
| sell the rights to that work to you. Why should the value
| of your purchase depend on how long I live? Should the work
| produced by a 20 year old be more valuable than the work
| produced by a 70 year old because the 20 year old is less
| likely to drop dead and end their work's copyright?
| mindcrime wrote:
| Maybe we should disallow selling / transfer of copyright
| rights then? Dunno, just spitballing ideas here.
| car_analogy wrote:
| Why not a flat duration? Why tie it to life of author in
| the first place - what's the benefit?
| gjvnq wrote:
| It makes sense to give some limited copyright to whoever spent
| the effort to go through the old papers and organize them into
| a publishable thing.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-05-18 23:02 UTC)