From the article:
"I know for a fact that Wikipedia operates under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license, which explicitly states that if you’re going to use the data, you must give attribution. As far as search engines go, they can get away with it because linking back to a Wikipedia article on the same page as the search results is considered attribution.
But in the case of Brave, not only are they disregarding the license - they’re also charging money for the data and then giving third parties “rights” to that data."
This not exclusive to brave, AI copyright is still not clear. Bing and others like Bard are doing the same.
Yeah and I expect it from those companies. I guess I was naive enough to think Brave would be better than this.
But then I didn’t know about Eich’s homophobia, antivaxx beliefs and basic awfulness either (as mentioned in the link u/Xaeris mentions.)
You linked to the Alexandrite app, not lemmy itself.
Whoops - sorry, fixed it now.
Honestly I don’t care about his political beliefs, and Brave search is the only competitve independent search engine out there, it’s genuinely a joy to use. Until AI crawling gets banned they aren’t doing anything wrong.
Brave continues to be the best mainstream private browser, backed by actions instead of empty words like Firefox.
You don’t think there’s anything wrong with selling you the ‘rights’ to other people’s content?