[deleted]
The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
821–830 of 912 posts
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#822Earlier quoted context omitted.
YouTube had made way more content creators wealthy than the NYT. Writers are not going to be paid more after this ruling either way.
Gadzooks! You're right! If only NYT had realised the secret to success was spewing out articles reacting to other articles reacting to other articles, they would all have been millionaires!
Did you forget the /s or do you not think that a lot of journalism is indeed reacting to other journalists?
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#823Time to move LLM training to Japan who passed a law giving free reign to train LLMs on copyrighted material.
Does allowing a model to train on copyrighted material implicitly mean associated output would also be legal? They plan to expand upon this decision, but I’m curious in the meantime.[1]. I’d assume this NYT problem would still exist in Japan.
[1]https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/Japan-panel-push...
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#824Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not copies, no matter how much you want them to be.
They are copied. If I can say something like “make a picture of xyz in the style of Greg rutkowski” and it does so, then it’s a copy. It’s not analogous to a human because a human cannot reproduce things like a machine can. And if someone did copy someone artwork and try to sell it, then yes that would be theft. The logic doesn’t change just because it’s a machine doing it.
Repeating what you want to be true doesn't make it so, in either technology or law.
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#825Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenAI IS distributing information they got wholesale from the internet Facts are not subject to copyright. It's very obvious ChatGPT is more than a search engine regurgitating copies of pages it indexed.
Facts are not subject to copyright That's false; but even assuming it's true, misinformation is creative content and therefore 99% of the Internet is subject to copyright.
No it is not. You can make a better argument than just BSing.
https://libraries.emory.edu/research/copyright/copyright-dat...
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#826Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not for or against anything at this point until someone gets their balls out and clearly defines what copyright infringement means in this context. If you give a bunch of books to a kid all by the same author and then pay that kid to write a book in a similar style and then I go on to sell that book...have I somehow infringed copyright? The kids book at best is likely to be a very convincing facsimile of the orig…
There are two problems with the “kid” analogy: a) In many closely comparable scenarios, yes, it’s copyright infringement. When Francis Ford Coppola made The Godfather film, he couldn’t just be “inspired” by Puzo’s book. If the story or characters or dialog are similar enough, he has to pay Puzo, even if the work he created was quite different and not a literal “copy”. b) Training an LLM isn’t like giving someone a bo…
>This copy is not a transitory copy in service of a fair use, nor likely a fair use in itself,
Seems vastly transitory and since the output cannot be copyrighted, does no harm to any work it “trained” on.
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#827Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not for or against anything at this point until someone gets their balls out and clearly defines what copyright infringement means in this context. If you give a bunch of books to a kid all by the same author and then pay that kid to write a book in a similar style and then I go on to sell that book...have I somehow infringed copyright? The kids book at best is likely to be a very convincing facsimile of the orig…
There are two problems with the “kid” analogy: a) In many closely comparable scenarios, yes, it’s copyright infringement. When Francis Ford Coppola made The Godfather film, he couldn’t just be “inspired” by Puzo’s book. If the story or characters or dialog are similar enough, he has to pay Puzo, even if the work he created was quite different and not a literal “copy”. b) Training an LLM isn’t like giving someone a bo…
> If the story or characters or dialog are similar enough, he has to pay Puzo, even if the work he created was quite different and not a literal “copy”.
I don't think that you can copyright a plot or story in any country can you?
If he re-wrote the story with different characters and different lines he wouldn't have had to to pay Puzo. I'm sure it would have been frowned upon if its too close, but legally ok.
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#828Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know the NYT has to fork out money to build the content right ?
Do you really think they're losing subscribers to ChatGPT...? Is there a single real person that thinks, "Oh, I don't need to pay the NYT anymore, I can just wait for the next OpenAI update six months from now and it'll summarize all the news for me"?
It's beside the point, the point is, money and time were spent producing that work, so why should OpenAI just be allowed to take it and profit from it, without at least attribution? It's absolutely ridiculous.
I saw an article the other day where they banned ByteDance's account for using their product to build their own, can you see the absolutely massive hypocrisy here?
It's fine for OpenAI to steal work, but if someone wants to steal theirs, it's not? I cannot believe people even try defend this shit. It's wack.
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#829Earlier quoted context omitted.
For all the leaks on: Secret projects, novelty training algorithms not being published anymore so as to preserve market share, custom hardware, Q* learning, internal politics at companies at the forefront of state of the art LLMs...A thunderous silence is the lack of leaks, on the exact datasets used to train the main commercial LLMs. It is clear OpenAI or Google did not use only Common Crawl. With so many press conf…
I'm not for or against anything at this point until someone gets their balls out and clearly defines what copyright infringement means in this context. If you give a bunch of books to a kid all by the same author and then pay that kid to write a book in a similar style and then I go on to sell that book...have I somehow infringed copyright? The kids book at best is likely to be a very convincing facsimile of the orig…
you might be well served by reading the actual complaint.
Re: The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement
#830Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you actually believe, with that statement? Do you believe Libraries are operating illegally? That they aren't paying rightsholders? Also: GPT is not a legal entity in the united states. Humans have different rights than computer software. You are legally allowed to borrow books from the library. You are legally allowed to recite the content you read. You're not allowed to sell verbatim recitation of what you…
> Humans have different rights than computer software Fortunately, the computer isn't the one being sued. Instead it is the humans who use the computer. And those humans maintain their existing rights, even if they use a computer.
Maybe (though there exist plenty of examples to the contrary). However, the NYT isn't suing you, ChatGPT user; they're suing OpenAI.