Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 250 posts

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#111

Post by px43 »

conradev wrote: post #35
rwl4 wrote: post #23

This project is designed to allow people to use ChatGPT via reversed engineered private APIs. It's not surprising they went after this. Here's the project description from the README: Have you ever come across some amazing projects that you couldn't use just because you didn't have an OpenAI API key? We've got you covered! This repository offers reverse-engineered third-party APIs for GPT-4/3.5, sourced from various…

Releasing code to use undocumented APIs is speech, and is regulated as such You have to run the code to violate the terms of use, which is primarily used to bar you from the service for misusing it.

This is why Microsoft's takeover of Github (and OpenAI for that matter) is so tragic. They weren't required to take this down. It got taken down because Microsoft didn't like it. Microsoft now has their hooks in the open source community and can crush any project who does something they don't like.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#112

Post by dubcanada »

smoldesu wrote: post #107
dubcanada wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you missed the memo of the comment. They were referring to the fact that everything ChatGPT is built on is other peoples work. Beyond the actual building of the model details, there is nothing that ChatGPT owns. All the content they use to train, all of the art they use to train. Everything is stolen/used without permission. Obviously there is more to it than that, because you published it on the internet. Bu…

If we enforced intellectual property rights that harshly, nothing more complex than a 6502 would have ever been made.

I personally don't think IP has a place in modern society. But I was mostly replying to the authors comment.

My concerns mostly lie with the fact it's owned largely by $MSFT rather than a more "open source" contributing to society entity. But again that's a much different topic.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#113

Post by dragonwriter »

ke88y wrote: post #59
Veen wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In exactly what respect is it illegal. Keeping in mind that "not complying with a corporation's policies" is not the same as breaking the law.

This is almost certainly an instance of Unauthorized Use under the CFAA and therefore criminal in the USA and any jurisdictions with similarly broad anti-hacking laws.

If those are APIs consumed by public sites, then they are APIs the public is authorized to use by way of those sites, and Van Buren v. United States says that if you are authorized to access a system, accessing it a different “manner or circumstances” is not “unauthorized” as that term is used in the CFAA.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#114

Post by unaindz »

Paul-Craft wrote: post #48
ranger_danger wrote: post #34

Doesn't the DMCA have an exception for reverse engineering if it's for the purposes of compatibility with other programs?

Yes, but it's not that simple: What Exceptions Does DMCA Section 1201 Have To Allow Reverse Engineering? Section 1201 contains an exception for reverse engineering, as well as security research, encryption research, and the distribution of security tools, all of which may support reverse engineering. However, these exceptions are drafted very narrowly. If your research might implicate section 1201, consult a lawyer t…

You can follow our instructions to try and appease the powers that be but we deserve the right to ignore our rules and go after you anyways. We are the Law.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#115

Post by cormacrelf »

jstummbillig wrote: post #103
dubcanada wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you missed the memo of the comment. They were referring to the fact that everything ChatGPT is built on is other peoples work. Beyond the actual building of the model details, there is nothing that ChatGPT owns. All the content they use to train, all of the art they use to train. Everything is stolen/used without permission. Obviously there is more to it than that, because you published it on the internet. Bu…

This litany is already getting old and it's just 2 month in. All intellectual property is inherently stolen. Just let it go.

The reason intellectual property was invented was to encourage people to go and create new things and share them, the logic being that having a monopoly on your own work by default means you can make money from being creative and therefore people will choose to do it. The reverse is already happening, people are deciding (privately) not to publish things they have created because they rightly assume it will be stolen by an AI, monetised and used to destroy their own job. It is not merely complaining for its own sake. There is a good amount of theft and a bad amount of theft. As theft increases unchecked the amount of new output is poised to decline.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#116

Post by RobotToaster »

mden wrote: post #63
withinrafael wrote: post #56

Are they really private APIs if they are accessible to the public in some form that can be reverse engineered?

Is the gas in the car you parked publicly really yours ("private") if there is a way to siphon it out? Just because there is a way to obtain a resource doesn't make it yours automatically..

An API is a publicly available service.

It's more like having a tap with a sign over it saying "free gas", then getting mad when people use it.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#117

Post by dragonwriter »

woogley wrote: post #105
Veen wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware companies could, by fiat, declare certain publicly available endpoints private, thereby compelling everyone by force of law to pretend they don't exist.

People have gone to prison over guessable GET parameters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goatse_Security#AT&T/iPad_emai... https://www.praetorianprefect.com/2010/06/114000-ipad-owners...

Citing convictions overturned on appeal probably isn't the strongest evidence of illegality. (Because they were overturned on threshold issues that didn’t involve inquiry into the substantive merits of the charges, its not evidence against illegality, either, but...)

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#118

Post by Kiro »

dubcanada wrote: post #99
ivalm wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are providing a service, we pay for it, and they reinvest in improving the service. That’s the basic business practice.

I think you missed the memo of the comment. They were referring to the fact that everything ChatGPT is built on is other peoples work. Beyond the actual building of the model details, there is nothing that ChatGPT owns. All the content they use to train, all of the art they use to train. Everything is stolen/used without permission. Obviously there is more to it than that, because you published it on the internet. Bu…

Imagine considering your random posts on reddit "work" and thinking people are stealing it when they train their models on your internet drivel.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#119

Post by bee_rider »

selfmodruntime wrote: post #37
conradev wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Releasing code to use undocumented APIs is speech, and is regulated as such You have to run the code to violate the terms of use, which is primarily used to bar you from the service for misusing it.

Time and time again. You are protected in your speech from the government . Commercial law does and will still apply. Arbitrary company decisions happen all the time, and GitHub makes it clear that they won’t refrain from deleting repos for whatever reason.

Any law is ultimately enforced by the government. There isn’t a different type of law to which the constitution doesn’t apply (I mean it doesn’t say a ton about limiting various types of laws—laws around contracts, state law, etc etc—but it still applies, it just doesn’t say much).

However, this seems more like an issue of corporate policy than law.

Github needs to have some policy that ends up with them taking down repos that actually host illegal content, they don’t have any legal obligation to host files, so they can respond to takedown notices by just taking down the files. This wouldn’t be the government forcing them to take down files, it would be them deciding not to try and parse the law very closely. But this is different from having an area of law where the constitution doesn’t apply, and it bears repeating, because the constitution is really important and the idea that there should be some sort of cutout where it doesn’t apply is bad for society.

Something we should grapple with as a society is whether poorly written, ambiguous laws should be interpreted as the government taking action by essentially forcing companies into be over zealous in their corporate policy.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#120

Post by Veen »

Bellamy wrote: post #106
RoyGBivCap wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No real world analogy applies when the service is publicly accessible via the internet.

If you leave a door open to your garden or house, can I come and chill without asking?

These analogies don't work. Sending a bunch of data to a computer and receiving a bunch of data in return is in no way analogous to physically entering private property without permission. They are not the same thing, or the same order of thing, or at all comparable.
Post reply on HN