The problem is that the law defines actions that are actually the actions of individual members of the organization as actions "by" the organization.
It is possible in the case of criminal actions to say "no, this agent of the corporation made the decision and is liable" but it happens rarely and requires blatant malfeasance.
Don't be silly... in neither of those cases did they just go ahead and say yeah you can do that it's okay. There needed to be a significant social good to allow the scanning as fair use. You are super simplifying these cases to try to argue that basically anything that you want to be allowed is fair use.
It's not clear that spicy autocomplete is even a good at all.
Oh hell no. They made us do that at ABB and it was like time travelling back to 1984 when 4.2BSD and SVr2 were hotness. Plus the Itanic compiler sucked: you really DID have to build a whole environment to generate to generate traces from your actual application and then recompile using them to get decent performance. There is no possible universe where Itanic could be described as an "upgrade".
@hipsterelectron Open Source is at least 20 years older than the events where the term "open source" was coined, and it was about programmers being more interested in people using their software than in trying and failing to sell enough copies to make it worth the effort to productize it in a market that only ever rewarded a lucky few.
The "making money from software is so god damned hard" part came first.
@christianselig I guess they don't want competing apps. At all. Which is probably a logical thing for them to want. But I think it's past time to go back to Usenet.
@jenniferplusplus@deweyritten If they get to the point that they're creating AI this may be useful, but nobody's actually doing that. Nobody has any real idea how to even start doing that.