While I don’t care to start arguing on moral responsibility and the like, regardless of how I feel on the subject, I do just want to point out one thing here. Azi, what you’re pointing to as a disclaimer, that you say backs up your claims, is not a disclaimer; it is a legally binding terms-of-use statement, and from what you said in the first post on this page, it seems that you’re interpreting it incorrectly. I would appreciate it if you don’t take this as a personal attack or anything of the like, since I really just want to make sure you understand what the irritating legal bullshit they’re spouting with that actually means.
What it says does not say that it will not interfere with anyone else’s revenue, royalties, etc. What it is saying is that, by using it, you’re saying that anything it makes it can use to do whatever it wants with. That means that it will take anything it wants, make anything it wants, and do whatever it wants with it, including selling it for any sum, using it to make ad revenue, or, well, anything else it wants. In essence, it’s saying “whatever this makes, we own”.
It says absolutely nothing about not taking money away from the artists that it takes the work from, which means that it is, in fact, taking away the income of those that it takes the work from (with exception to works that are open and available for such a thing). You’d never be able to make money from anything it creates, since once it creates something it now owns it and it is the sole entity that can make money from the creation.
Done in by the dubious doings of destiny.
18-Dec-2022 23:35:12