23B1

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Not really. I don't just walk up to Random House and get my book on the B&N endcap. Also please define good author.

I'm certain you understood my point.

OP's argument is a common one amongst the IP entitlements crowd.

Totally cool! I'm confused how that's related to what I'm saying though.

Fair use was designed for teachers photocopying pages of Walden for their pupils to read over the weekend. Not industrial-scale laundering of IP to benefit shareholders.

"Information wants to be free"

No, you want it to be free. The people whose labor created that information didn't want it to be free, especially for some gigacorp to launder while hiding behind fair use.

As a long-time writer, this case will have impact on me, but I maintain a fool's hope a Meta loss will significantly weaken IP-laundering megacorps.

OP is making the spurious argument that technology should have the same ethical entitlements as humans. It's on par with "information wants to be free".

[flagged]

My general sense of HN is that it is pretty well moderated even if a bit opaquely. It's a niche audience who is gonna have their preferences that will bleed through, but also it's not designed to enable provocative or controversial discussions just because those tend to hit runaway condition pretty quickly. I myself have been hit a few times with the hammer but on the whole its been a pretty consistently good community even if a little monoculture-y.