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

Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 599 posts

Re: Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

#241

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

Larrikin wrote: post #174

If they ripped all of Bibliotik, the more interesting story to me is how they were able to get it all without hitting ratio requirements? Super fast internet that downloaded all they could before being ratio banned, overwhelmingly fast internet that was hopping on all the popular torrents to slowly build up ratio?

How does Bibliotik base their rate limiting? Per-IP? Per-account? Would it be possible to create a massive number of accounts and use a massive network of crawlers that could work around rate limits?

Re: Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

#242

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

ravenstine wrote: post #29

Copyright law may eventually destroy business models founded upon AI. Maybe piracy will prevail in correcting the system as it did with entertainment before media companies accepted streaming.

> Copyright law may eventually destroy business models founded upon AI.

I think you have that backwards.

Mark my words.

Re: Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

#244

Post by tzs »

magoghm wrote: post #236
MisterBastahrd wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downloading is illegal. That people do not normally get sued or prosecuted for downloading does not mean that they cannot get sued or prosecuted.

It is distribution of copyrighted material without permission of the author that is illegal, when you download you're not distributing so it isn't illegal (unless you're using something like BitTorrent that also distributes it while you're downloading it).

In the US permission is required to make copies, prepare derivative works, distribute copies, publicly perform the work, or publicly display the work [1].

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106

Re: Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

#245

Post by lyu07282 »

mgerdts wrote: post #23
homero wrote: post #21

She'd have to sue every student that writes an essay on a book they'd read

... on a book that they’d illegally acquired then read.

But don't you see what a strange argument that is? It doesn't matter, the student did nothing wrong, I don't want to live on a planet where we put DRM into peoples brains (or AI for that matter) to enforce this absurd and overreaching idea of intellectual property.

And besides the publishers extorting thousands from young students forced to buy their overpriced mediocre textbooks, warrants any copyright infringement of any book anytime and forever at any scale. Publishers have lost all moral legitimacy in their copyright claims in my book. Copyright is not magic, it's a social contract at the end of the day and they have broken it first.

Re: Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

#246

Post by makeitdouble »

pessimizer wrote: post #237
makeitdouble wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If AI companies get to successfully argue the two points below, what source was used becomes irrelevant. - copyright violation happened before the intervention of the bot - what LLMs spit out is different enough from any of the source that it is not infringing on existing copyright If both stand, I'd compare it to you going to an auction site and studying all the published items as an observer, coming up with your re…

> - copyright violation happened before the intervention of the bot What is this supposed to mean? The bot didn't "intervene," it was executed by its operators, and it was trained on illicit material obtained by its operators. The LLM isn't on trial. It's not a person.

I see it as the same argument as whether Google is under the hook for its crawler going through the copyright infringing sites and having an index of the content, even if it isn't surfaced (redistributed) in the user search results.

Re: Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

#247

Post by getmeinrn »

patches11 wrote: post #229
getmeinrn wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>then the use of that content downstream is tainted What does that mean exactly? That's why I used the "looking at a stolen painting" example. Sure, pirating materials is illegal. But I don't think that's the big implication that people are getting at here. Is it legal to sell original works derived from perceiving stolen materials? Seems to me that it is.

In this case the correct analogy would be you brought a stolen painting into your house, looked at it for a while, and then produced your derivative work. Surely you see the issue here? Receiving stolen property?

Yes, I acknowledged that piracy is illegal in my previous post. That's not what the lawsuit is about, according to The Verge:

>In the OpenAI suit, the trio offers exhibits showing that when prompted, ChatGPT will summarize their books, infringing on their copyrights.

Re: Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

#249

Post by tzs »

havnagiggle wrote: post #235
edgyquant wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He hacked into a server to release a database of paywalled studies to the public. Not only is it not the same but it was the hacking that brought charges upon him.

It's been quite a few years, but AFAIK he didn't hack JSTOR. He downloaded papers en mass using a guest MIT account that had legal access to JSTOR. Maybe he violated their terms, but that is not illegal. He did illegally trespass an unlocked MIT switch closet to do this. They blocked several IPs but his script would rotate to continue. The downloading was over a week or two, enough for security to set up a camera in…

Here are details on what the charges were, and on whether or not any of them were justifiable.

http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/

http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-agains...

Re: Sarah Silverman is suing OpenAI and Meta for copyright infringement

#250

Post by TeMPOraL »

magoghm wrote: post #232
NegativeK wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possession of copyrighted material without permission of the creator is illegal, but yes -- rights holders don't really go after infringers except maybe via ISP three strikes crap. They're very much incentivized to change their behavior for AI scraping, though.

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that copyright law typically regulates the unauthorized reproduction, distribution, public display, or creation of derivative works of copyrighted materials. Possession of copyrighted material in itself is not illegal. It's how you use that material that could potentially violate copyright laws.

IANAL either, but FWIW, it's literally in the name - copyright. Not "ownership rights", but "copying rights".
Post reply on HN