Live data from Hacker News

Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

wired.com

21–30 of 352 posts

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#22
The legal system is not going to be kind to the AI hucksters. Why? Because, quite stupidly and counterproductively, they have stepped on its toes by claiming that AI can replace lawyers. On top of that, there have been incidents of lawyers getting in hot water for generating slop instead of doing their work. So, this isn't just some distant, abstract tech issue for the lawyers and judges, like whether APIs should be copyrighted. If you're in any kind of business, you generally want these people to be on your side. Oopsies!

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#23
post #3

I think the headline is a bit misleading. Mets did pirate the works but may be entitled to use them under fair use. It seems like the authors are setting up for failure by making the case about whether the AI generation hinders the market for books. AI book writing is such a tiny segment what these models do that if needed Meta would simply introduce guard rails to prevent copying the style of an author and continue…

Do you not understand that "fair use" is not some copyright free-for-all which lets you use works wholesale without attribution as if they were suddenly public domain?

To make fair use of a book's passage, you have to cite it. The except has to be reasonably small.

Without fair use, it would not be possible to write essays and book reviews that give quotes from books. That's what it's for. Not for having a machine read the whole book so it can regurgitate mashups of any part of it without attribution.

Making a parody is a kind of fair use, but parodies are original expression based on a certain structure of the work.

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#24
post #20
post #12

> “What about the next Taylor Swift?” he asked, arguing that a “relatively unknown artist” whose work was ingested by Meta would likely have their career hampered if the model produced “a billion pop songs” in their style. I have this debate with a friend of mine. He's terrified of AI making all of our jobs obsolete. He's a brilliant musician and programmer both, so he's both enthused and scared. So let's go with the…

I think that argument is further hampered (taylor being an exception) by the fact that most pop stars already don't write their own songs. If people like Max Martin can pump out multiple hit songs for multiple groups, it kinda shows that who wrote the song doesn't matter. Has making music for a living ever not been tough?

> Has making music for a living ever not been tough?

Fair.

> I think that argument is further hampered (taylor being an exception) by the fact that most pop stars already don't write their own songs.

That accounts for the big artists on the radio (yes some people listen to that). But, what about everyone else? I would posit that most artists (the one-hit wonders, the ones without radio success, etc.) write their own songs. It seems like there's such acts who make a go of it just fine, who write their own songs and really nail the connection with fans. I would point to a regional band near me: Mr. Blotto.

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#25
post #5

The title for this submission is somewhat misleading. The judge didn't make any sort of ruling, this is just reporting on a pretrial hearing. He also doesn't seem convinced as to how relevant downloading books from LibGen is to the case: > At times, it sounded like the case was the authors’ to lose, with [Judge] Chhabria noting that Meta was “destined to fail” if the plaintiffs could prove that Meta’s tools created s…

The RIAA lawyers never had to demonstrate that copying a DVD cratered the sales of their clients. They just got high penalties for infringers almost by default.

Now that big capital wants to steal from individuals, big capital wins again.

(Unrelatedly, has Boies ever won a high profile lawsuit? I remember him from the Bush/Gore recount issue, where he represented the Democrats.)

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#26
post #5

The title for this submission is somewhat misleading. The judge didn't make any sort of ruling, this is just reporting on a pretrial hearing. He also doesn't seem convinced as to how relevant downloading books from LibGen is to the case: > At times, it sounded like the case was the authors’ to lose, with [Judge] Chhabria noting that Meta was “destined to fail” if the plaintiffs could prove that Meta’s tools created s…

To me it’s a totally insane argument from the judge, if it doesn’t stop the authors from making money on their works, then the judge is basically capping the income on all writers. The AI is totally useless without their knowledge and yet they have to prove they aren’t hurting its profits. Like these authors are entitled to derivative uses of their writing, if they’re not it’s a total farce.

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#27
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meta did pirate the works but may be entitled to use them under fair use What fair use? Were the books promised to them by god or something?

Fair use allows for certain uses of copyrighted works without a specific license for those works. One of the major criterion is how transformative the work is and an LLM model is very different from the original work so it seems likely that criterion at least is met.

> an LLM model is very different from the original work

True, but not the only relevant thing.

If the output of the LLM is "not very different from the original work" then the output could be the infringement. Putting a hypercomplex black box between the source work and the plagiarised output does not in itself make it "not infringing". The "LLM output as a service" business is then based on selling something based other people's work, that they do not have rights to.

It's falling for misdirection, "pay no attention to the LLM behind the curtain" to think otherwise.

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#28
post #8

Whether or not Meta wins this case, I'm never going to support any government that supports both LLMs and IP. Like we have to put up with IP despite having no clear value to a digital society but as soon as it becomes inconvenient it goes out the window? Nah, let's just trash the state and start over. It's going to take centuries to undo the damage wracked by IP-supported private enterprise. And now we also have to p…

I hope you don't think I'm snarky because I'm serious. If you're an American citizen you can homestead in Alaska and cut yourself off from all this if you like.

edit: i'm serious. many americans would be much happier taking this option if they knew it existed. i may take it myself

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#29
post #3

I think the headline is a bit misleading. Mets did pirate the works but may be entitled to use them under fair use. It seems like the authors are setting up for failure by making the case about whether the AI generation hinders the market for books. AI book writing is such a tiny segment what these models do that if needed Meta would simply introduce guard rails to prevent copying the style of an author and continue…

The problem is that "harm" as defined by copyright law is strictly limited to loss of sales due to breach of that copyright; it makes no allowment (that I know of) to livelihoods lost by the theft of the work indefinitely, as AI boosters suggest their tools can do (replace people). The way this court case is going, it's an uphill battle for the plaintiffs to prove concrete harm in that very narrow context, when the r…

> Artists and creatives can cite their inspirational sources

Even humans have a lot of internalized unconscious inspirational sources, but I get your point.

Re: Judge said Meta illegally used books to build its AI

#30
post #3

I think the headline is a bit misleading. Mets did pirate the works but may be entitled to use them under fair use. It seems like the authors are setting up for failure by making the case about whether the AI generation hinders the market for books. AI book writing is such a tiny segment what these models do that if needed Meta would simply introduce guard rails to prevent copying the style of an author and continue…

> but may be entitled to use them under fair use.

Why? Was it legal for me to download copyrighted songs from Limewire as "fair use"? Because a few people were made examples of.

I'm a musician, so 80% of the music I listen to is for learning so it's fair use, right? ;)

Post reply on HN