Added 2025/06/2025-06-18-anthropic-counternotice.md #17917
Merged
+51
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
|
||
| The central nexus of the copyright act is, the "idea / expression" dichotomy, that "ideas" are protected by patents, and that "expressions" are protected by copyright. Moreover assuming that the works that were created by Anthropic are most likely created by AI, the copyright act has stated that there is no copyright protections for AI created works, so I am doubtful that this particular work even qualifies for copyright to begin with. Moreover in the case Oracle v. Google, with regards to the dispute over the java JVM, Google's use of the work was considered to be non infringing. Lastly the is the nature of the use of the work, and whether it replaces the original work in the market. The purpose of the work, as was put into the documentation, was that I was going to create a vastly different derivative work, based on my own architecture principals, which you would have seen if you would have not sent a mass DMCA complaint. Compliance with 17 USC 512(f) when considering fair use, is not an "optional" because you have many many forks of the same project, and therefore if you take this to court I will seek damages not only for copyright abuse (see e.g. Lentz v. Universal), in addition to seeking damages for the use of DEI programs, and I may also look to other things like Qui Tam under the false claims act if you have government contracts, and violations of dual use export controls, because I am quite frankly not a person to be trifled with, and only those who are without sin should cast the first stone. | ||
|
|
||
| I get the "doth protest too much" vibes, about why you would need to protect the IP of some console program that uses your compute credits, and I suspect that you are trying to cover your ass with regards to things like privacy and security backdoors or consumer protections. Moreover sending me a copyright notice accomplishes absolutely nothing, I will still release the "swissknife" project, which will be hopefully much better in conceptualization, and i suggest if you don't like that, you come back with the patent claim, and otherwise that you can fork what I make because it will be AGPL licensed, and you can use it to sell more compute credits. Otherwise I literally have no money for you to come after me with, but you are a giant money cow, so I encourage you to think twice and get someone who has 20 years experience to come talk to me, because I am loathe to deal with morons. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[nitpick] The tone in this line is overly aggressive and unprofessional for a formal counter notice. Consider revising the language to maintain a respectful and objective tone that aligns with legal communication best practices.
Suggested change
| I get the "doth protest too much" vibes, about why you would need to protect the IP of some console program that uses your compute credits, and I suspect that you are trying to cover your ass with regards to things like privacy and security backdoors or consumer protections. Moreover sending me a copyright notice accomplishes absolutely nothing, I will still release the "swissknife" project, which will be hopefully much better in conceptualization, and i suggest if you don't like that, you come back with the patent claim, and otherwise that you can fork what I make because it will be AGPL licensed, and you can use it to sell more compute credits. Otherwise I literally have no money for you to come after me with, but you are a giant money cow, so I encourage you to think twice and get someone who has 20 years experience to come talk to me, because I am loathe to deal with morons. | |
| I question the necessity of protecting the intellectual property of a console program that utilizes compute credits, as it raises concerns about potential issues related to privacy, security, or consumer protections. Sending me a copyright notice does not change my intention to release the "swissknife" project, which I aim to improve significantly in terms of conceptualization. If there are concerns about this, I suggest addressing them through appropriate legal channels, such as a patent claim. The project will be AGPL licensed, allowing others to fork and use it to their benefit. I encourage you to approach this matter thoughtfully and consult with an experienced professional to ensure a constructive resolution. |
Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is an automated pull request to sync changes from upstream repository.
Diff summary:
A 2025/06/2025-06-18-anthropic-counternotice.md