Book publishers sue Meta over AI’s ‘word-for-word’ copying
date linked: 5 May 2026
source: link to article, from theverge.com
This is a good example of how thorny the AI problem is, and why I strongly prefer a digital labor critique to a copyright critique. Yes, I’m mad that Meta trained their models on my work, but I don’t think the answer is to strengthen Elsevier or Cengage’s copyright claims.
similar posts:
Jacques Ellul and success as the only techbro metric
🔗 linkblog: Pluralistic: It’s extremely good that Claude’s source-code leaked (02 Apr 2026) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
digital labor and generative AI: what Stack Overflow CEO Prashanth Chandrasekhar gets wrong
why I think labor, not copyright, is the foundational problem with AI scrapers
I don’t think copyright is the best argument against generative AI (strengthening copyright law will benefit big companies more than small creators), but “can’t make an AI omelette without breaking a few copyrighted eggs 🤷🤷🤷” is still a depressingly cynical national policy.
comments:
You can click on the < button in the top-right of your browser window to read and write comments on this post with Hypothesis.