GOVERNMENT ACTUALLY CONSIDERING PUTTING HUMANS BEFORE SOULLESS CODE MACHINES IN SHOCKING TWIST
LONDON — In a move that has tech bros everywhere clutching their $10,000 watches and spilling oat milk lattes on their Teslas, British MPs have suggested the f@#king WILD idea that maybe, just maybe, actual living artists deserve payment for their work more than faceless algorithm factories deserve free content.
TECH BILLIONAIRES DISCOVER CONCEPT OF “PAYING FOR THINGS”
Two parliamentary committees yesterday made the apparently revolutionary suggestion that human beings who create things should be compensated when trillion-dollar tech companies hoover up their life’s work to train silicon-based thinking rectangles that will eventually replace them.
“We’ve run the numbers and it turns out artists can’t eat exposure or pay rent with ‘being part of the glorious AI revolution,'” said committee chair Sir Obvious Statement. “Shocking, we know.”
The announcement sent shockwaves through Silicon Valley, where 97.8% of tech executives reportedly had to Google what “fairly remunerated” means.
TECH INDUSTRY RESPONDS WITH COMPLETELY REASONABLE ARGUMENTS
“But how will our poor, struggling multi-billion dollar companies survive if we have to actually PAY for content?” wailed Chip Entitlement, CEO of DefinitelyNotSkynet Inc. “Next you’ll tell us we need to pay taxes too!”
Tech industry spokesperson Dr. Ima Thief explained that requiring consent before using artists’ work would “catastrophically slow innovation,” a process that apparently requires stealing sh!t that doesn’t belong to you.
“Look, we’ve built our entire business model on taking other people’s hard work without permission,” said Thief. “Changing that now would force us to develop actual business ethics, which frankly sounds exhausting.”
ARTISTS CELEBRATE WITH EXTRAVAGANT RAMEN DINNERS
The UK’s creative community celebrated the news by splurging on name-brand instant noodles and fantasizing about someday affording health insurance.
“You mean I might actually get PAID when my entire portfolio that took 20 years to create is used to train an algorithm that can replicate my style in 0.3 seconds?” said incredulous illustrator Pen E. Less. “What’s next, respect?”
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS FOUND CAPABLE OF BASIC HUMAN DECENCY
In what experts are calling a “statistical anomaly,” MPs appear to have momentarily considered the welfare of actual voters instead of tech company lobbyists.
“We briefly remembered that artists are people and corporations are not,” admitted one MP who requested anonymity for fear of appearing human. “We’re seeking treatment for this lapse in judgment immediately.”
According to sources, 94% of politicians who supported artists’ rights have already received strongly worded emails from tech lobbyists reminding them who funds their campaigns.
THE OPT-OUT OPTION: BECAUSE ASKING FIRST IS JUST TOO DAMN HARD
The committees specifically criticized the government’s brilliant plan to make creators “opt out” of having their work stolen, rather than requiring tech companies to ask permission first.
“Having to actively say ‘please don’t steal my sh!t’ is working GREAT for email spam and telemarketing, so surely it will work for people’s entire livelihoods too,” said Professor Sarcasm from the University of No F@#king Kidding.
If implemented, creators would need to spend approximately 37 hours per day submitting opt-out requests to every AI company on Earth, many of which conveniently operate from countries with no copyright laws whatsoever.
At press time, Parliament was considering revolutionary follow-up legislation suggesting that perhaps other industries should also consider not stealing things, a concept expected to blow at least 48% of corporate minds.
