this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2026
805 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

87450 readers
3466 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Redtrax@lemmy.ml 50 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Amazon, destroying books, this is such a full circle moment for them

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

They also love to publish stuff exclusively through Amazon so libraries won't get it.

[–] ParadoxSeahorse@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

I wish I had fewer opportunities to post this gif, I hate it

[–] tremble5218@programming.dev 80 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Amazon wasn't caught doing shit. "Caught" implies there is a possibility of consequences. Two days from now nobody is going to remember this story and the world will move on and there will be no consequences for this.

[–] derg@lemmy.world 25 points 5 days ago (2 children)

"caught" also implies they've been hiding it... It's been out in the open how they scan books to train AI for a while now.

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I don't think most people realize that the most efficient process for scanning books involves disassembling them.

So of course they're upset to hear the books are disposed of afterwards.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 10 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It has been almost a trope that every time the discussion of them buying up the used market and cutting them up to scan, some apologist comes along and says that these books are mass produced garbage and not rare.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 8 points 4 days ago

Whistle-blown?

I wish there were any path for accountability anymore.

[–] ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com 137 points 5 days ago (5 children)

More alarming was the upshot of that lawsuit: a judge ruled that because Anthropic was turning the physical texts into digital ones and destroying the original copies, it was “transformative” and therefore didn’t violate copyright law.

So by that token if someone digitizes a physical medium and makes it available to the public copyright is no longer valid. Otherwise, having it ingested by an AI has no purpose it it's not meant to be referenced in response to requests by the end user.

[–] IHeartBadCode@fedia.io 72 points 5 days ago (1 children)

No it only applies to books because books have an entirely different legal system than everything else.

SCOTUS case: White-Smith Music Publishing Co. v. Apollo Co. (1908) created a new issue for the Government about copying people's printed works.

Copyright Act of 1909 is passed. New framework is established, books get an entirely different legal system from everything else. Publishers lobbied to prevent it's passage and fought it especially hard in the Great Depression because libraries were becoming very popular during that time.

But printed books have a whole different thing that applies to them that doesn't apply to anything else. So you can't use "physical medium" because books are a special case and have their own special US law.

For books, transformative, has to deal with the intent.

  • Book - I want to read them.
  • Anthropic - I want to convert it to weights for use in massive matrix multiplication operations.

Since the intent is different, the book first sale doctrine applies here to grant transformative. Which is but just one pillar in their defense.

Same goes for what Google did like a decade ago.

  • Book - I want to read them.
  • Google - I want to convert it to a searchable database of terms that can refer you to the correct ISBN.

And transformative applies too to things like DVDs, it's just under a different framework known as the DMCA.

  • DVD - I want to watch the movie.
  • MP4 - I want to watch the movie.

That's not transformative.

  • DVD - I want to watch the movie.
  • MP4 - I want to take clips to make memes.

That is transformative. And again, transformative is but one thing out of the whole "fair use" thing.

This is the thing. Those news articles are oversimplifying a massive amount of legal technicalities. I'm not saying what Anthropic is doing is correct or not. What I am saying is that the conclusion that people are getting from these stories is like the last 10% of a massively technical legal battle. And running with that small amount can lead to conclusions that aren't true.

And I know someone is going to bring it up. No you aren't LEGALLY allows to rip a copy of a DVD for your personal use. Violates the DMCA. BUT in order to sue you, a publisher has to know ahead of time before discovery, that you broke their encryption scheme, which if you only keep it personally, is impossible for them to ever enforce. So we have a law that is written in a way, that if you never put it online, it's impossible to enforce the law. As a summary of how all that works.

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 18 points 5 days ago (2 children)

The articles are oversimplifying because the law is impossibly complex, but the moral hazard is obvious.

It’s like they’re murdering orphans and someone tries to argue it’s actually state sanctioned manslaughter.

[–] TheOctonaut@piefed.zip 11 points 5 days ago (3 children)

It's not impossibly complex. You've just had it explained to you pretty well and succinctly.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 22 points 5 days ago

Oh! Can I play? Let me transcode a video into a new format and put it on a blu-ray and then delete the old file! Transformative, lol.

[–] HieroProtagonist@feddit.org 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You are witnessing the last days of copyright of any form right now - mark my words!

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

That is probably the ultimate conclusion. Except there will be some bullshit exception for Disney and all the other mega media corporations.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ManOMorphos@lemmy.world 24 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Can they at least provide all the scans to the public for free? It's not like anyone is going to care if they violate copyright, that only applies to regular people.

[–] RFKJrsBrainworm@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 days ago

That's why they are scanning them and destroying them. Someone realized they can capitalize knowledge. We're going to get the privilege of letting billionaires gate keep information and knowledge

[–] irinotecan@lemmy.world 23 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Unfortunately, that would violate copyright law. In fact, the whole point of the destruction is to circumvent copyright, as apparently there was a ruling that scanning, tokenizing, and then destroying the original is transformative enough to be considered, "fair use."

[–] ManOMorphos@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

You are definitely right. It just sucks that destroying books is "fair use" while using movie clips to make a parody video gets taken down with little recourse.

You think they give a fuck? These people are going to get to the point where they would take aim at random people with rifles and shoot them for fun and then act like they did nothing wrong.

Of course they would see an issue with that... If they are aiming themselves, it means they can be aimed at... So they will do it via drone.

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 2 points 2 days ago

I've been boycotting Amazon since 2004. Waiting for everybody else to see it too. ... See it yet?!?? Everybody?!??

[–] vane@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago
[–] stylusmobilus@aussie.zone 17 points 4 days ago

Friends don’t let friends use any form of Amazon they can choose to.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 16 points 4 days ago

They tracked the shipment to a site at a massive Amazon warehouse in Nevada, where workers say their job is to strip the spines off of books they receive so they can quickly scan their pages, destroying them in the process.

So what they're saying is, we should start making as many legit-looking books full of bullshit and gibberish as possible, then send them to Nevada where they can be used to help "train" their AI.

[–] dudeface@lemmy.world 41 points 5 days ago (5 children)

I stopped using Amazon like 8 years ago over various previous inhumane issues

Seems the rest of the world prefers slightly more convenience

What are you gonna do I guess

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 21 points 5 days ago (6 children)

just remember. the planet is going to be just fine.

1000004453

remember how quickly wildlife came back when covid shutdowns hit? it'll be like that when the last human dies.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Zephorah@discuss.online 12 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I ask people every now and then, the theme of the answer is similar: one stop shopping, it’s easier than looking elsewhere, answering with the question where else am I going to go? People tend to take the shortest path between A and B.

There are some things you can only find there, sure, but there’s more of a shopping dopamine hit if you look around. Other retailers do exist. Most of the time you can find it elsewhere.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why not just scan them carefully and use the pictures?

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The answer to that question is obvious. They can do it 1000x faster cutting the spin and sending all the pages through a scanner. Otherwise you have to have something flip through every page and take a picture.

I figured. But sometimes the inconvenience should be part of it. I am fucking sorry. This is just disgusting...

[–] workerONE@lemmy.world 22 points 5 days ago (1 children)

They scan them and destroy them so other AI companies can never get them.

[–] boonhet@lemmy.zip 19 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Other AI companies can still buy them, they're just rare because nobody bought them in the first place. They destroy them because scanning them is faster and in some jurisdictions that absolves you from copyright infringement since the amount of copies doesn't go up

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 10 points 4 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] halezinflames@lemmus.org 25 points 5 days ago

Amazon never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity

[–] Auth@lemmy.world 15 points 5 days ago (3 children)

https://lemmy.world/search?q=rare+books&type=Posts&listingType=All&page=1&sort=New&titleOnly=true

This has been posted to death. Does this really need ot be a weekly thread? There is nothing to discuss its bad and we hate AI and we hate amazon.

[–] kadotux@sopuli.xyz 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I've been on Lemmy since 2023 and I've never seen this article. Not everybody is chronically online. Please don't listen to this guy.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Akasazh@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

The most ironic thing is that this is the only way that the current cultural metastasis appreciates rare knowledge. Which we once did!

Like music it is the most fundamentally human endeavor and it has been destructively gamified. Thank fucking god for libraries, support yours!!!!!

[–] supersquirrel@lemmy.ca 13 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

Where I draw the line for whether it is ethical to light things on fire is when they start destroying rare knowledge and books as fast as possible for no other reason than to hoard and obscure knowledge for private benefit.

It is one thing to fund the creation of knowledge and then hoard it, it is entirely another to begin actively attacking and destroying pre-existing publicly shared resources of knowledge in the pursuit of monetizing access to that very knowledge behind a gargantuan profit motivated entity.

[–] DrakeAlbrecht@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago

They're destroying the books because it's cheaper than scanning them intact.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›