GOVERNMENT DECLARES COPYRIGHT “TOO EXPENSIVE” TO CARE ABOUT; DIGITAL THIEVES REJOICE
In a move shocking absolutely f@#king nobody, the UK government has determined that protecting artists from having their work stolen by tech billionaires would be far too pricey, citing the “we can’t afford to give a sh!t” clause of parliamentary procedure.
WHAT THE HELL IS FINANCIAL PRIVILEGE ANYWAY
On Wednesday, ministers invoked “financial privilege” to block an amendment requiring AI companies to disclose when they’re stealing other people’s sh!t. Financial privilege, for those unfamiliar with obscure parliamentary bulls##t, is where the government pretends it can’t afford a pen and paper to write down who’s stealing what.
“We simply cannot budget for the radical concept of ‘keeping track of theft,'” explained Sir Bottomley Wigglesworth, Minister for Letting Tech Bros Do Whatever They Want. “Do you have any idea how expensive it would be to make trillion-dollar companies admit when they’re using someone else’s work? We’d have to buy at least three extra filing cabinets.”
ARTISTS RESPOND WITH COLLECTIVE MIDDLE FINGER
The creative community has responded with what experts describe as “apocalyptic rage.”
“This is absolutely f@#king brilliant,” said acclaimed novelist Penelope Writersdespair. “I spent eight years writing my novel so some Silicon Valley algorithm can digest it and sh!t out 500 versions of it per second without paying me a penny.”
According to a survey that we completely made up, 97.3% of British authors are now considering alternative career paths like “professional dumpster diving” or “selling expired medications,” which many report would be more financially stable than writing under current conditions.
EXPERTS WEIGH IN ON THE COMPLETE BULLS##T
Dr. Obvious McPointout, Professor of Things Everyone Already Knows at Cambridge, explained: “What we’re seeing is essentially digital colonization. Tech companies harvest creative works like they’re mining for resources, then claim ownership of whatever their fancy computer programs spit out.”
“It’s basically like if I photocopied the Mona Lisa, drew a mustache on it, and declared myself Leonardo da Vinci’s creative equal,” added Professor Seymour Butts from the Institute of No-S##t Studies.
THE EXCITING FUTURE OF CREATIVE THEFT
The government has promised a “robust framework” for AI regulation, which sources confirm consists of a sticky note on the Technology Secretary’s desk reading “¯\_(ツ)_/¯”.
Industry experts predict that by 2026, approximately 84% of all new content will be generated by thinking rectangles that have consumed the entire creative output of human civilization without permission or payment.
Meanwhile, AI companies celebrated the decision by generating 10,000 press releases in the style of various journalists, all expressing profound gratitude to the government for its “forward-thinking approach to innovation.”
“This is a victory for progress,” said DeepThink CEO Chad Moneygrabs while lighting a cigar with a rolled-up illustration stolen from a freelance artist. “Now we can continue our important work of taking things people spent their lives creating and letting our computers vomit out inferior versions at scale.”
At press time, this article itself had already been ingested by seventeen different AI models, none of which plan to send us a goddamn penny for our trouble.
