Unlike common law countries such as the UK and the US, Japan adopts a
statutory law system.
Therefore, Japan needed to amend its Copyright Act to promptly address
copyright issues as machine learning technology became practical.
I understand that the current Japanese Copyright Act aims to comply
wi
On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 12:10 PM Stefano Maffulli
wrote:
> The cases may never be resolved and be settled out of court with
> conspicuous payments.
>
The plaintiffs definitely want a precedent in case law, and some of them
have deep pockets.
> you're **vastly** overestimating your power to dra
On 5/31/24 18:11, Bruce Perens via License-discuss wrote:
I'm not convinced. I think we are talking about existing implications
of copyright that should be resolved through case law in the United
States.
I don't hold my breath: The cases may never be resolved and be settled
out of court with co
On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 5:08 AM Stefano Maffulli
wrote:
> You should realize that you're implicitly arguing for an extension of
> copyright at the expense of freedom of research, open knowledge and open
> science, before Open Source.
>
I'm not convinced. I think we are talking about existing imp
On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 10:14 AM Bruce Perens via License-discuss
mailto:license-discuss@lists.opensource.org>> wrote:
It is unfortunate that Japan made the choice that it did, because it
makes Open Source software fair game for those who would profit from
the work of our developers with
The path, as Shuji-san implied, is by using contract terms, and it's going
to be a little different from Open Source. I don't know if anyone has a
lawyer-approved license ready for you. You can look at what I'm working
toward at postopen.org . The license there has contract terms that I hope
will w
Thanks so much for the insight, Bruce, Shuji, and Josh.
Sounds like I find myself at a bit of a murky point in history for open
source project licensing/copyright. I was wondering if maybe weak copyleft
licenses might help over permissive licenses but honestly seems like that's
irrelevant. I'd be
Hi Sado-san,
It is unfortunate that Japan made the choice that it did, because it makes
Open Source software fair game for those who would profit from the work of
our developers without attribution or remuneration and entirely outside of
their license terms. I came to the conclusion that this coul
In general, Japanese copyright law is considered to be one of the most
compatible with machine learning in the world.
Training AI with open source code is basically considered legal, and
even for commercial software code, AI training is legal as long as it
is not explicitly prohibited by contract.
On 5/18/24 17:06, Miles Georgi wrote:
Hi! If I open-source a project with a free license, if code from that
project winds up being used as training data or prompt data to a
code-generating AI to generate similar code, would that generated code
be considered a derived work under any circumstance
1. Not in Japan, because they've decided to make their law that way. 2. It
should be the case in most countries, but it is not so far because it's not
literal copying and cases which are attempting to make the point that it is
copying are still in litigation.
On Sat, May 25, 2024, 06:55 Miles Geor
Hi! If I open-source a project with a free license, if code from that
project winds up being used as training data or prompt data to a
code-generating AI to generate similar code, would that generated code be
considered a derived work under any circumstances? And does that
potentially depend on wha
12 matches
Mail list logo
