On: All web "content" is freeware

[Retric]

There’s nothing ambiguous from a copyright perspective, it’s a derivative work. People seem to confuse plagiarism in an academic environment from copyright. Simply using your own words doesn’t mean you’re free from copyright.

However even when something infringes copyright that doesn’t mean anything necessarily happens. Just look at YouTube’s early history or the mountains of fan fiction out there.

[codetrotter → Retric]

> Just look at YouTube’s early history

But something did happen. Viacom and others sued them, and then YouTube introduced their Content ID system so that they could pay copyright holders for content that others uploaded, as well as to take down videos belonging to copyright holders that did not agree to other people uploading their content.

[Retric → codetrotter]

> something did happen

Yes, it took 2 years after creation and truly massive amounts of copyright infringement before the lawsuits by copyright owners showed up. OpenAI is getting sued, but don’t expect your requesting a website be rewritten to provoke anything unless you publish such rewritten posts at scale or something.

[coldtea → codetrotter]

>then YouTube introduced their Content ID system

That's for content that's reproduced in part or fully, but verbatim (like a song, movie clip, etc, where Content ID can apply).

But the parent's point is you can have trouble even for content where you "retell" something "in your own words".

[codetrotter → coldtea]

The part I was responding to is this:

> However even when something infringes copyright that doesn’t mean anything necessarily happens. Just look at YouTube’s early history or the mountains of fan fiction out there.

This part is talking about uploading a copy of something verbatim, the way I read it.