nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyd968gmewwp6kyqpqhykucplphuhelaxutcw4jw3vuu7gcg42czhqmk7jhchs8vdga4fschugpy Hypothetically, if someone were to extract all the brush strokes from a file, wrote th...
@nprofile1q...
> retyped that book back into a file and re-rendered them to claim that it's original work
You are describing an infringing *use*, which does not make the machine itself infringing. This is a bedrock of copyright law, established in 1984 with the Supreme Court's ruling in Sony v Universal (the Betamax decision), which I referenced in my thread: "A device capable of sustaining a substantial noninfringing use is not infringing."
> retyped that book back into a file and re-rendered them to claim that it's original work
You are describing an infringing *use*, which does not make the machine itself infringing. This is a bedrock of copyright law, established in 1984 with the Supreme Court's ruling in Sony v Universal (the Betamax decision), which I referenced in my thread: "A device capable of sustaining a substantial noninfringing use is not infringing."
2