They frame it as though it’s for user content, more likely it’s to train AI, but in fact it gives them the right to do almost anything they want - up to (but not including) stealing the content outright.

  • esc27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    5 months ago

    Am I missing something? To me this just seems like standard legalese to avoid petty lawsuits. The derivative works clause even give transcription as an example.

    The moral objection part seems more strange but maybe it has something to do with playlists or tagging.