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

US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 410 posts

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#31

Post by tantalor »

bgwalter wrote: post #13
prvc wrote: post #6

The released draft report seems merely to be a litany of copyright holder complaints repeated verbatim, with little depth of reasoning to support the conclusions it makes.

The required reasoning is not very deep though: If an AI reads 100 scientific papers and churns out a new one, it is plagiarism. If a savant has perfect recall, remembers text perfectly and rearranges that text to create a marginally new text, he'd be sued for breach of copyright. Only large corporations get away with it.

If AI really could "churn out a new scientific paper" we would all be ecstatically rejoicing in the dawning of an age of AGI. We are nowhere near that.

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#32

Post by nadermx »

prvc wrote: post #6

The released draft report seems merely to be a litany of copyright holder complaints repeated verbatim, with little depth of reasoning to support the conclusions it makes.

Not only does it read like a litany[0]. It seems like the copyright holders are not happy with how the meta case is working through court and are trying to sidestep fair use entirely.

https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intell...

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#33

Post by glial »

bgwalter wrote: post #13
prvc wrote: post #6

The released draft report seems merely to be a litany of copyright holder complaints repeated verbatim, with little depth of reasoning to support the conclusions it makes.

The required reasoning is not very deep though: If an AI reads 100 scientific papers and churns out a new one, it is plagiarism. If a savant has perfect recall, remembers text perfectly and rearranges that text to create a marginally new text, he'd be sued for breach of copyright. Only large corporations get away with it.

It reminds me of the old joke.

"To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research."

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#34

Post by School-Cotton »

Zambyte wrote: post #30
brador wrote: post #17

Lifetime for human copyright, 20 years for corporate copyright. That’s the golden zone.

Zero (0) years for corporate copyright, zero (0) years for human copyright is the golden zone in my book.

Why?

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#35

Post by viraptor »

tantalor wrote: post #31
bgwalter wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The required reasoning is not very deep though: If an AI reads 100 scientific papers and churns out a new one, it is plagiarism. If a savant has perfect recall, remembers text perfectly and rearranges that text to create a marginally new text, he'd be sued for breach of copyright. Only large corporations get away with it.

If AI really could "churn out a new scientific paper" we would all be ecstatically rejoicing in the dawning of an age of AGI. We are nowhere near that.

We're relatively close already https://openreview.net/pdf?id=12T3Nt22av And we don't need anything even close to AGI to achieve that.

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#37

Post by shkkmo »

bgwalter wrote: post #13
prvc wrote: post #6

The released draft report seems merely to be a litany of copyright holder complaints repeated verbatim, with little depth of reasoning to support the conclusions it makes.

The required reasoning is not very deep though: If an AI reads 100 scientific papers and churns out a new one, it is plagiarism. If a savant has perfect recall, remembers text perfectly and rearranges that text to create a marginally new text, he'd be sued for breach of copyright. Only large corporations get away with it.

> If a savant has perfect recall, remembers text perfectly and rearranges that text to create a marginally new text, he'd be sued for breach of copyright.

Any suits would be based on the degree the marginally new copy was fair use. You wouldn't be able to sue the savant for reading and remembering the text.

Using AI to creat marginally new copies of copyrighted work is ALREADY a violation. We don't need a dramatic expansion of copyright law that says that just giving the savant the book to real is a copyright violation.

Plagarism and copyright are two entirely different things. Plagarism is about citations and intellectual integrity. Copyright is a about protecting economic interests, has nothing to to with intellectual integrity, and isn't resolved by citing the original work. In fact most of the contexts where you would be accused of plagarism, would be places like reporting, criticism, education or research goals make fair use arguments much easier.

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#38

Post by ta1243 »

scraptor wrote: post #24
bgwalter wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The required reasoning is not very deep though: If an AI reads 100 scientific papers and churns out a new one, it is plagiarism. If a savant has perfect recall, remembers text perfectly and rearranges that text to create a marginally new text, he'd be sued for breach of copyright. Only large corporations get away with it.

Plagiarism is not an issue of copyright law, it's an entirely separate system of rules maintained by academia. The US Copyright Office has no business having opinions about it. If a AI^W human reads 100 papers and then churns out a new one this is usually called research.

Only when those papers are referenced

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#39

Post by dfxm12 »

scraptor wrote: post #24
bgwalter wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The required reasoning is not very deep though: If an AI reads 100 scientific papers and churns out a new one, it is plagiarism. If a savant has perfect recall, remembers text perfectly and rearranges that text to create a marginally new text, he'd be sued for breach of copyright. Only large corporations get away with it.

Plagiarism is not an issue of copyright law, it's an entirely separate system of rules maintained by academia. The US Copyright Office has no business having opinions about it. If a AI^W human reads 100 papers and then churns out a new one this is usually called research.

Please argue in good faith. A new research paper is obviously materially different from "rearranging that text to create a marginally new text".

Re: US Copyright Office found AI companies breach copyright. Its boss was fired

#40

Post by Zambyte »

School-Cotton wrote: post #34
Zambyte wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zero (0) years for corporate copyright, zero (0) years for human copyright is the golden zone in my book.

Why?

It took me a while to be convinced that copyright is strictly a bad idea, but these two articles were very convincing to me.

https://drewdevault.com/2020/08/24/Alice-in-Wonderland.html

https://drewdevault.com/2021/12/23/Sustainable-creativity-po...

Post reply on HN