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

OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 845 posts

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#81

Post by zombiwoof »

ajross wrote: post #56
triceratops wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I download a book without paying for it, and print copies of it? Stash copies in my bathroom, the gym, my office, my bedroom etc. to basically have a copy on hand to study from whenever I have some free time? What about movies and music?

> Can I download a book without paying for it, and print copies of it? No, but you can read a book, learn its contents, and then write and publish your own book to teach the information to others. The operation of an AI is rather closer to that than it is to copyright violation. "Should" there be protections against AI training? Maybe! But copyright law as it stands is woefully inadequate to the task, and IMHO a lot…

If you buy it

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#82

Post by ajross »

triceratops wrote: post #78
ajross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can I download a book without paying for it, and print copies of it? No, but you can read a book, learn its contents, and then write and publish your own book to teach the information to others. The operation of an AI is rather closer to that than it is to copyright violation. "Should" there be protections against AI training? Maybe! But copyright law as it stands is woefully inadequate to the task, and IMHO a lot…

But I can't legally obtain the book to read and learn from without me (or a library) paying for it. Let's start there first.

Yes, but the learning isn't constrained by those laws. If I steal a book and read it, I'm guilty of the crime of theft. You can put me in jail, try me before a jury, fine me, and put me in prison according to whatever laws I broke.

Nothing in my sentence constrains my ability to teach someone else the stuff I learned, though! In fact, the first amendment makes it pretty damn clear that nothing can constrain that freedom.

Also, note that the example is malformed: in almost all these cases, Meta et. al. aren't "stealing" anything anyway. They're downloading and reading stuff on the internet that is available for free. If you or I can't be prosecuted for reading a preprint from arXiv.org or whatever, it's a very hard case to make that an AI can.

Again, copyright isn't the tool here. We need better laws.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#83

Post by tmpz22 »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #42

It probably needs to be a law not an executive order but I don't hate the idea. States have the power to make it prohibitively expensive to operate in those states, leaving people to either go to VPNs or use AI's hosted in other countries where they don't care if they're not following whatever new AI law California decides to pass. And companies would choose just to use datacenters not in the prohibitive states and b…

Are you advocating to take the power relegated to the states away from the states and give it to the federal government in direct violation of the Constitution of the United States?

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#84

Post by ajross »

zombiwoof wrote: post #81
ajross wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can I download a book without paying for it, and print copies of it? No, but you can read a book, learn its contents, and then write and publish your own book to teach the information to others. The operation of an AI is rather closer to that than it is to copyright violation. "Should" there be protections against AI training? Maybe! But copyright law as it stands is woefully inadequate to the task, and IMHO a lot…

If you buy it

No, even if I steal it. I can teach you anything I know. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, as it were.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#85

Post by int_19h »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #42

It probably needs to be a law not an executive order but I don't hate the idea. States have the power to make it prohibitively expensive to operate in those states, leaving people to either go to VPNs or use AI's hosted in other countries where they don't care if they're not following whatever new AI law California decides to pass. And companies would choose just to use datacenters not in the prohibitive states and b…

Interstate commerce clause by itself doesn't prevent it; it merely gives Congress the ability to override the state laws if Congress deems it necessary.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#87

Post by crorella »

Terretta wrote: post #79
crorella wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just like a model could It is not remotely the same, the companies training the models are stealing the content from the internet and then profiting from it when they charge for the use of those models.

> the companies training the models are stealing the content from the internet Are you stealing a billboard when you see and remember it? The notion that consuming the web is "stealing" needs to stop.

We are not taking about billboards here, we are talking about copyrighted works, like books. If you want to do mental gymnastics and call "consuming" the web the act of downloading books without paying for them, then go ahead, but don't pretend the rest will buy your delusion.

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#88

Post by dtquad »

It is interesting that it is not the Hollywood/Music/Entertainment copyright lobby (RIAA, MPAA etc.) that is lobbying US states to go after OpenAI and other American AI companies.

It's the New York Times and various journalist and writers' unions that are leading the charge against American AI.

American journalists and opinion piece writers want to kill American AI and let China and Russia have the global lead. Why? Have they taught about the long consequences of what they are doing?

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#89

Post by hiatus »

tmpz22 wrote: post #83
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #42

It probably needs to be a law not an executive order but I don't hate the idea. States have the power to make it prohibitively expensive to operate in those states, leaving people to either go to VPNs or use AI's hosted in other countries where they don't care if they're not following whatever new AI law California decides to pass. And companies would choose just to use datacenters not in the prohibitive states and b…

Are you advocating to take the power relegated to the states away from the states and give it to the federal government in direct violation of the Constitution of the United States?

How is this not directly tied to interstate commerce (and copyright law) and thus under Congress' enumerated powers?

Re: OpenAI asks White House for relief from state AI rules

#90

Post by bryanrasmussen »

triceratops wrote: post #74
nightpool wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you're allowed to make personal copies of copyright works that you own. IANAL, but my understanding is that if you're using them for yourself, and you're not prevented from doing so by some sort of EULA or DRM, there's nothing in copyright law preventing you from e.g. photocopying a book and keeping a copy at home, as long as you don't distribute it. The test case here has always been CDs—you're allowed to make…

CDs, software, and electronic media, yes. Physical books, no. You can't make archival copies.

sure you can, you could take a physical book, and painstakingly copy each page at a time, that is totally fair use.
Post reply on HN