Next up, Microsoft acquires the New York Times forming MSNYT
This is not impossible, and perhaps not even unlikely
NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
71–80 of 921 posts
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#72Would be funny if NT Times won this and all commercial LLMs were shut down.
Then LLMs would be distributed only via torrents, like most copyright infringing media.
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
"They" also include the people working there. Why someone work with full time writing articles should give the work for free just let someone to train it and make money out of it as a consequence?
>Why someone work with full time writing articles should give the work for free They are not giving it out "for free", in fact they're being paid by their employer to write these articles. Moreover, the writers themselves stand noth' to gain from their past writings financially as they don't belong to the ownership structure of the business.
Their ability to make money in the future is directly tied to their employers' ability to make money with their content. This is a closed financial loop. If OpenAI or any other AI company wants in, they should pay a licensing fee or get the laws changed, not just assume that they can take what they want and pretend like there are no negative consequences for the creator or the rights-holder.
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow they want to kill it. I wonder if we've just lived through the golden Napster era of LLMs.
Just train on NYT articles no longer in copyright. We may be better for it.
Or buy them. OpenAI market cap is many times NYT.
If we see court judgements start to go copyright owners way, we will also see a scramble from AI companies to buy the few publishers with enough data to be worth buying, and to create works for hire to replace the rest.
In the long run a copyright ruling like that will be a boon for OpenAI and all other players with deep enough pockets to do so, and massively harm everyone else who will suddenly find it far harder to build models legally.
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
ChatGPT only advertises itself as a fancy autocomplete. There is a disclaimer that it may produce output that appears correct but isn't. NYtimes written material purports itself to be the truth, thus shouldn't be held to the same standards as a generative AI obviously.
I think what we should focus on is the volume of misinformation in general, not the provenance of it. The NYT may produce misinformation but it aims not to, and its staff of human writers are limited in the quantity that they can produce. They also publish corrections. GPT enables anyone who can pay to generate a virtually unlimited volume of misinformation, launder it into 'articles' with fake bylines and saturate t…
> The NYT may produce misinformation but it aims not to, and its staff of human writers are limited in the quantity that they can produce. They also publish corrections.
Except when it affects their bottom line of course, they publicly lied on how meta tags work during the lawsuits against Google to get more money (like most newspapers did). And I have no doubt that they will extensively lie once again on how LLM really work.
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
If said professor offered a service where anyone could ask them for information that is behind a paywall, and they provided it without significant transformation, this would certainly be copyright infringement that the copyright holder would have every right and motivation to take action against.
I think the scale only matters here (probably). Because I will find it hard that a teacher/professor will not be allowed to setup a service where they will teach and provide their knowledge for others. That is basically the concept of teaching. Of course until LLM, we never had this scale before. Millions of potential learners vs the normal hundreds in a classroom session. So that makes the new case interesting
"Teaching" by copying source books word for word, would be copyright infringement; see, for example, the well-known issues around photocopying books or even excerpts.
Also lying on source materials (e.g. telling students that some respected historian denies the Holocaust happened, when it's obviously not the case) is not "teaching" - it's defamation, and the NYT is absolutely right to pursue that angle too.
Using LLMs as general-purpose search engines is a minefield, I would not be surprised if the practice disappeared in the next 20 years. Obviously the tech is here to stay, there is no problem when it's applied to augmenting niche work; but as a Google replacement, it has so many issues
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
If said professor offered a service where anyone could ask them for information that is behind a paywall, and they provided it without significant transformation, this would certainly be copyright infringement that the copyright holder would have every right and motivation to take action against.
Would parroting back article content perfectly from memory certainly be copyright infringement?
Go perform a song in a public place without a licencing arrangement and let us know.
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#78I've been arguing since ChatGPT came out that LLMs should fall under fair use as a "transformative work". I'm not a lawyer and this is just my non-expert opinion, but it will be interesting to see what the legal system has to say about this.
What if I ask ChatGPT to print the article verbatim as sourced, from its own dataset?
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI bros What (or whom) do you consider to be an "AI bro?" This sort of ad hominem generalization usually accompanies a weak argument.
Young males that wear Tensorflow branded muscle tank tops and drive Mitsubishi Eclipse convertibles with the vanity plate OVERFIT. They are everywhere these days.
Thank you for the absurd visual. The vanity plate, especially, was worth saving for last. Somehow, the car is well suited, also. Love how they prefer Tensorflow over Pytorch, too.
Re: NY Times copyright suit wants OpenAI to delete all GPT instances
#80Seems reasonable - they probably broke the TOS of the site
On the other hand, NYT website willingly gave out all the information without imposing limitations. Seeing terms of service requires visiting a separate page, they aren't seen immediately upon visiting the website. Understanding and accepting the terms also requires a human interaction.
robots.txt on nytimes.com now disallows indexing by GPTBot, so there's an argument against automated information acquisition starting from some moment, but before some moment they weren't explicitly against that.