this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2025
648 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

68864 readers
4674 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Jack Dorsey, co-founder of Twitter (now X) and Square (now Block), sparked a weekend’s worth of debate around intellectual property, patents, and copyright, with a characteristically terse post declaring, “delete all IP law.”

X’s current owner Elon Musk quickly replied, “I agree.”

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 34 points 4 days ago

The current US trade war is the perfect opportunity for some other country or countries to "right-size" their IP laws.

Hollywood wanted "lifetime plus 900 years" or whatever. So, whenever the US negotiated a trade deal it said "you only get tariff-free access to our markets if you give Hollywood lifetime plus 900 years in your country too."

With section 1201 of the DMCA this also meant that other countries had to accept that you could only repair your John Deere tractor if you paid Deere for the privilege. Or that HP could prevent you from using any ink but theirs in your printer, allowing them to make printer ink the most expensive liquid on the planet.

If the US is no longer abiding by the terms of their trade agreements, other countries should no longer honor these absurd IP treaties.

[–] Xenny@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

Hold on hold on. Don't mention a damn thing

[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 39 points 4 days ago (10 children)

I’m cool with it. I think we should require almost everything to be public domain. But I think those personally contributing to the public domain should be recognized, and no one should be allowed to get rich off of it.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 27 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

You're cool with it until you realize that they only want to do this to personally gain from it. And guaranteed will protect their own IP, and the IP of every large corporation.

It's just that you yourself and small businesses will no longer have the benefit of intellectual property. Megacorps can steal whatever they want with impunity since they are the only true holders of intellectual property.

That sounds good on paper until you look at the long history of these people and how everything they do is entirely focused on their own benefit over that of others. They gain something to win here, guaranteed they aren't going to let themselves lose on anything either.

It's the same sort of situation as AI regulation. Sam Altman and openai want the United States to crack down and make it extremely difficult to develop new models. Why? So that they don't have any competition. They already got their foot in the door they want to close the door for anyone else.

This is very likely the same sort of situation.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] randomname@sh.itjust.works 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

This is the only thing he's ever done or said that I agree with, even though his real intentions are obvious. We really do need a complete re-writing of IP law, but not from Elon.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gargolito@lemm.ee 35 points 4 days ago (4 children)

The libertarians want everything for free. Interesting.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 22 points 4 days ago (1 children)

And the second they get it, they reinvent IP law, but in an even more restricted form.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 31 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Dorsey got fired from his own company by the board for incompetence.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] dzso@lemmy.world 22 points 4 days ago

Musk is out to delete all laws that don't benefit him, and replace them with harsh private rules that are not accountable to the people.

[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 4 days ago
[–] mhague@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

Well a billionaire commanded we argue about copyright law. I guess we need to expend our energy and build enough momentum so that Musk can grab more power during the turmoil.

Trumpers did their part by arguing about free speech. Time to tap into our issues with IP laws and help Musk too!

[–] HalfSalesman@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

As much as I also would like IP law to die, I do not think that these two saying such means much.

Jack Dorsey is not in government and worth a 100th of what Musk is worth. And Elon Musk is evil and retarded.

[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 15 points 4 days ago

Now that it interferes with me I'm against it. As soon as it's absence causes me any grief I'll be for it again.

[–] theblips@lemm.ee 6 points 3 days ago

Can't disagree here, this would be great

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

These people are threats to our actual lives.

[–] alphahowler@lemm.ee 11 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Avoiding tax loopholes and fair taxation for billionnaires could also be considered. Just saying. Otherwise I think that the idea of deleting all IP laws is just wishful (and naive) thinking, assuming people would cooperate and build on each other’s inventions/creations.

Given the state the world is currently in, I don’t see that happening soon.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] qaz@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago (1 children)

A real nuisance for all those AI datasets, huh?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] VolumetricShitCompressor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Disney has entered the chat

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NostraDavid@programming.dev 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] Geobloke@lemm.ee 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] primemagnus@lemmy.ca 19 points 4 days ago

If Elon agrees with anything… run.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 17 points 4 days ago (14 children)

That's probably better than what we have now, but still very short of ideal. Here's my proposition:

  • keep trademark law as-is
  • cut patents to 5-7 years, with a one-time extension if the holder can demonstrate need
  • cut copyright to 14 years (original 1790 Copyright Act duration), with a one-time explicit extension, approved based on need
  • have existing patents and copyright expire at their original term, the above (for works patented/copyrighted within the term), or half the above (for works copyrighted outside the term), whichever is shorter

That would solve most of the problems while keeping the vast majority of the benefits.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Hard yes. Glad to see there's at least one thing we are aligned on.

[–] twice_hatch@midwest.social 19 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Nah copyright is useful for free software. Patents, we could probably live without patents

Trademark is also useful. I don't want Tyson making fake vegan hot dogs

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›