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

The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 912 posts

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#221

Post by Zpalmtree »

ethanbond wrote: post #145
desireco42 wrote: post #60

This is just rent seeking from dying media instead of working on creating something new in my view. AI indeed is reading and using material sa a source, but is deriving results based on that material. I think this should be allowed, but now it is a fight who has better paid politicians pretty much. I am open to hear other thoughts.

Here’s another thought: It’s good that there are real incentives to produce original content. Especially investigative journalism which is an extremely tough business financially — even without LLMs — but with lots of social value. It would be silly to totally destroy the incentive to produce new technologies like LLMs, but so wouldn’t it be silly to destroy the incentive to produce original, high-quality content eit…

How are the LLMs rent seeking? they are clearly providing value that people want to pay for..

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#222

Post by [deleted] »

alexey-salmin wrote: post #181
dissident_coder wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If NYT wins this, then there is going to be a massive push for payouts from basically everyone ever…I don’t see that wallet being fat for long.

If LLMs actually create added value and don't just burn VC money then they should be able to pay a fair price for the work of people they're relying upon. If your business is profitable only when you get your raw materials for free it's not a very good business.

[deleted]

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#223

Post by nullindividual »

logicchains wrote: post #192
alexey-salmin wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If LLMs actually create added value and don't just burn VC money then they should be able to pay a fair price for the work of people they're relying upon. If your business is profitable only when you get your raw materials for free it's not a very good business.

By that logic you should have to pay the copyright holder of every library book you ever read, because you could later produce some content you memorised verbatim.

Copyright holders do get paid for library copies, in the US.

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#224

Post by solarpunk »

mbrumlow wrote: post #103
zztop44 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a paid streaming service that has, say, the Lord of the Rings trilogy as part of their catalogue. They’ll be happy if you send people searching for “watch Lord of the Rings now” to their landing page. But if instead you send everyone who searches for that an .mkv of Lord of the Rings that’s ripped from their site, they’ll probably be be less happy.

Wha rid that .mkv was actually a high quality reenactment with different actors and millions of slight differences peppered throughout the story. And if a viewer of the original and a viewer of the .mkv talked about the movie they would agree on most things. But the color of the sunset or the home town name of the main character maybe different?

Warner Brothers sued and won against Asylum for this very thing lmao. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mockbuster

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#225

Post by noitpmeder »

mbrumlow wrote: post #103
zztop44 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a paid streaming service that has, say, the Lord of the Rings trilogy as part of their catalogue. They’ll be happy if you send people searching for “watch Lord of the Rings now” to their landing page. But if instead you send everyone who searches for that an .mkv of Lord of the Rings that’s ripped from their site, they’ll probably be be less happy.

Wha rid that .mkv was actually a high quality reenactment with different actors and millions of slight differences peppered throughout the story. And if a viewer of the original and a viewer of the .mkv talked about the movie they would agree on most things. But the color of the sunset or the home town name of the main character maybe different?

Well at the very least it would be an interesting court case!

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#226

Post by LordKeren »

ubutler wrote: post #157
NiloCK wrote: post #109

Interesting. I think the appropriation, privatization, and monetization of "all human output" by a single (corporate) entity is at least shameless, probably wrong, and maybe outright disgraceful. But I think OpenAI (or another similar entity) will succeed via the Sackler defense - OpenAI has too many victims for litigation to be feasible for the courts, so the courts must preemptively decide not to bother with compen…

What does the Sackler defence refer to?

The Sackler family owned Purdue Pharma, which created OxyContin and heavily marketed the drug. Many Americans see the family as partially responsible for kickstarting the opioid epidemic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sackler_family

The family has been largely successful at avoiding any personal liability in Purdue’s litigations. Many people feel the settlements of the Purdue lawsuits were too lenient. One of the key perceived aspects of the final settlements was that there was too many victims of the opioid epidemic for the courts to handle and attempt to make whole.

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#227

Post by ametrau »

gwright wrote: post #99
lp4vn wrote: post #21

For me it's quite obvious that if you make a profit from an engine that has as an input copyrighted material, then you owe something to the owner of this copyrighted content. We have seen this same problem with artists claiming stable diffusion engines were using their art.

If you study copyrighted material for four years at a university and then go on to earn money based on your education, do you owe something to the authors of your text books? I'm not sure how we should treat LLMs with respect to publicly accessible but copyrighted material, but it seems clear to me that "profiting" from copyrighted material isn't a sufficient criteria to cause me to "owe something to the owner".

“Teh al al m is just leik a people. Check and mate.”

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#228

Post by wg0 »

delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #164
wg0 wrote: post #123

Google can look up into their index and can remove whatever they want to, within minutes. But how that can be possible for an LLM? That is, "decontaminate" the model from certain parts of the corups? I can only think of excluding the data set from the training and then retrain? As a side note, I think LLM frenzy would be dead in few years, 10 years time frame at max. The rent seeking on these LLMs as of today would n…

> almost no workload (other than CAD, Graphics) runs on Windows or Unix including this very forum About a fifth to a quarter of public-facing Web servers are Windows Server. Most famously, Stack Overflow[1]. [1]: https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/10370/1424704

20% of workloads running on Windows should result in corresponding number of jobs as well but that's not what I see.

Most companies are writing software with software developed on Linux first and for Linux first (or Unix) and later ported to Windows as an after thought. I'm thinking Python, Ruby, NodeJS, Rust, Go, Java, PHP but not seeing as much of C#/ASP.NET which should at least be 20% of the market?

Only two explanations - either I am in a social bubble so don't have exposure or writing software for Windows is so much easy that it takes five times less engineering muscle.

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#229

Post by pama »

jprete wrote: post #189
pama wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[edit: they have since opened a comment section to the article.] It is unfortunate that the NYTimes don’t allow reader comments to this article. I like some of the NYTimes content, but in this case use of chatGPT is infinitely more valuable to me than subscribing to the NYTimes, so I would like to explain this concept and the associated risks by their litigation without cancelling my subscription. Maybe it is time to…

The ChatGPT subscription is more valuable because it's built on the theft of the NYT content and many other authors' work.

No. It is a technology that can massively accelerate human progress—I don’t buy the theory that OpenAI used NYTimes content that was not freely available to them. If you read all of the public internet you probably have lots of snippets of NYTimes articles. Regarding the reading of the wirecutter by a browser tool, I don’t know how much of it is available online without subscription (because I subscribe to the NYTimes), but arguably if it is available I’d expect a helpful AI to read it and other sources and give me a short recommendation for what I look for (and not the ads or sponsored links).

Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement

#230

Post by soultrees »

Here come the innovation sponges.

If this goes through then the models that the general public have access are going to be severely neutered while the ownership class will have a much better model that will never see the light of day due to legal risks and claims like this - therefore increasing the disparity between us all.

Post reply on HN