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

121–130 of 250 posts

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#121

Post by KRAKRISMOTT »

supermatt wrote: post #43

Not to be confused with gpt4all https://github.com/nomic-ai/gpt4all which is a "free" GPT LLM. It seems this gpt4free was basically hijacking 3rd parties services that use GPT-4, bypassing the official OpenAI APIs in order to avoid paying for inference. Of course, that means that the hijacked 3rd parties are the ones footing the bill... I'm not surprised they have been issued a takedown notice.

Why is OpenAI getting involved? They are getting paid either way. The third parties should do the takedown if they are not happy about their endpoint being scraped.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#122

Post by dragonwriter »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #84
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.

> Keeping in mind that "not complying with a corporation's policies" is not the same as breaking the law. Actually, the law says that the Terms of Service is a legally-binding contract unless you can prove any provision is legally considered unconscionable. However, if that happens, all provisions except that provision still bind. It is illegal to break a legally-binding contract, and you can be sued or taken to arbi…

> Actually, the law says that the Terms of Service is a legally-binding contract unless you can prove any provision is legally considered unconscionable

No, it doesn’t.

It says they can state the terms of a contract if all the requirements of contract formation have been met, which are more than just the absence of unconscionable terms.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#123

Post by salad-tycoon »

Kiro wrote: post #118
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…

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

All the misguided comments of my younger years coming to haunt me? Nightmare. Luckily I deleted my live journal many moons ago.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#124

Post by wtallis »

spzb wrote: post #76
vorpalhex wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that's not correct. You are actually very protected in documenting security flaws, and even republishing them. I am unsure of who you think enforces laws... as far as I know OpenAI doesn't have their own police force yet. They can sue you of course, but they generally can't demand compliance with takedowns in this case without first going to a judge and requesting a court order. There is no "commercial law" unle…

I'm not a lawyer or even an American but that certainly isn't how the DMCA works. The takedown is issued against the hosting company and, if they comply, they have no further liability. If they don't comply, they are liable in court so, of course, they all comply.

There's a difference between being compelled by a court order to take down a repo and choosing to comply with a DMCA takedown notice of dubious validity because you don't want to waste any more time on the issue and are happy to screw your users.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#125

Post by woogley »

dragonwriter wrote: post #117
woogley wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...)

My point is people have gone to prison over GET parameters, not the legality of the it. DOJ has CFAA. Abusing private APIs is flying close to the sun. Even if you do get out of prison eventually

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#126

Post by dragonwriter »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #100
Veen wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm assuming the users of Gpt4free haven't signed up to OpenAI's terms and conditions, even if they do contain language prohibiting use of these private APIs. A corporation can't unilaterally impose their TOS on the entire population (or, at least, one would hope they can't).

In that case though, let's say OpenAI decided to enforce their Terms of Use by potentially suing. The defendant would likely have to show, whether he likes it or not, that he never once signed up for ChatGPT, never once signed up for the official OpenAI API, and managed to perfectly reverse-engineer the API from the outside. Seems unlikely to me. But then of course... CFAA and DMCA. The DMCA in particular, for exampl…

> The defendant would likely have to show, whether he likes it or not, that he never once signed up for ChatGPT, never once signed up for the official OpenAI API, and managed to perfectly reverse-engineer the API from the outside.

These aren’t reverse engineering the OpenAI API, they are reverse engineering the APIs of public services that in turn call the OpenAI API.

I’m not sure under what theory OpenAI would even sue.

> But then of course... CFAA and DMCA. The DMCA in particular, for example, doesn't consider the strength of the lock in the criminality.

The DMCA only applies to technology addressing copyrights, and CFAA seems inapplicable to consuming the backend APIs used by publicly accessible services because that’s just use of authorized access by a different manner, outside of CFAA scope under the Van Buren precedent.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#127

Post by drusepth »

KRAKRISMOTT wrote: post #121
supermatt wrote: post #43

Not to be confused with gpt4all https://github.com/nomic-ai/gpt4all which is a "free" GPT LLM. It seems this gpt4free was basically hijacking 3rd parties services that use GPT-4, bypassing the official OpenAI APIs in order to avoid paying for inference. Of course, that means that the hijacked 3rd parties are the ones footing the bill... I'm not surprised they have been issued a takedown notice.

Why is OpenAI getting involved? They are getting paid either way. The third parties should do the takedown if they are not happy about their endpoint being scraped.

Presumably, they're looking out for their paying users (see: they want to keep those paying users), who would have a terrible experience if and when they found out someone else had been using their APIs and/or API keys.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#128

Post by dragonwriter »

woogley wrote: post #125
dragonwriter wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...)

My point is people have gone to prison over GET parameters, not the legality of the it. DOJ has CFAA. Abusing private APIs is flying close to the sun. Even if you do get out of prison eventually

> My point is people have gone to prison over GET parameters, not the legality of the it. DOJ has CFAA.

And CFAA is limited by Van Buren.

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#129

Post by msla »

Kiro wrote: post #118
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…

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

So it's valueless when the original author wants it to have value and valuable when OpenAI wants it to have value?

I am all for training AIs, but at least exhibit some self-consistency in your arguments!

Re: Gpt4free repo given takedown notice by OpenAI

#130

Post by dagss »

Veen wrote: post #120
Bellamy wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The only "real" thing about either of those 2 cases is social conventions.

Is is entirely impossible to imagine a culture where walking unbidden into private property is very normal but pinging someone electronically without a common understanding is an intrusion?

Post reply on HN