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

Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

variety.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 484 posts

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#51

Post by GolfPopper »

grebc wrote: post #29
ben_w wrote: post #2

A lot of people would be very pleased if this leads to Zuckerberg getting even the statutory minimum damages ($750?) on each infringement. The previous infringement case with Anthropic said that while training an AI was transformative and not itself an infringement, pirating works for that purpose still was definitely infringement all by itself. The settlement was $1.5bn, so close to $3k for each of the 500k they pir…

Nothing will happen to him/Meta while DJT is president. He bought the best protection around for breaking the law.

[flagged]

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#52

Post by kodt »

swader999 wrote: post #38

I take issue with the use of tense used in this framing. Its not 'infringed' its 'infringing' and to say that it happened is wrong, its happening and happening continuously in these models that are in use. To say a one time payment settles it is missing the whole scope of this theft. Royalties are owed and continuously owed as these models are deployed and doing inference. How is it any different to paying a small pi…

If you steal a book and read it, should you have to pay every time you use the knowledge gained or recall parts of it from memory?

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#53

Post by alex1138 »

ipython wrote: post #36

Just gonna say... Aaron Swartz faced years of prison time and ultimately decided to take his own life... for downloading scientific journal articles ... to share freely with the world (aka not even profiting from it). But a multi-billion dollar corporation downloading millions of copyrighted creative works so that they can reshape the entire labor market by training a new type of artificial intelligence model on that…

Had Aaron copied Snapchat 5 times the DOJ would've been fine with it all. His fault for not having the foresight

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#54

Post by ronsor »

swader999 wrote: post #38

I take issue with the use of tense used in this framing. Its not 'infringed' its 'infringing' and to say that it happened is wrong, its happening and happening continuously in these models that are in use. To say a one time payment settles it is missing the whole scope of this theft. Royalties are owed and continuously owed as these models are deployed and doing inference. How is it any different to paying a small pi…

Royalties for inference are unrealistic in a way that even royalties for training aren't.

The LLaMA models were released openly. Copies exist everywhere in the world. You aren't going to be able to charge someone for running `llama.cpp`; a court order ceases to have practical relevance at that point.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#55

Post by jcalvinowens »

I had to block meta's ASN on my personal cgit server a few weeks ago because they were ignoring robots.txt and torching it. Like hundreds of megabytes of access logs just from them, spread around different network blocks to clearly try and defeat IP based limiting. I couldn't believe it.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#56

Post by drfloyd51 »

kodt wrote: post #52
swader999 wrote: post #38

I take issue with the use of tense used in this framing. Its not 'infringed' its 'infringing' and to say that it happened is wrong, its happening and happening continuously in these models that are in use. To say a one time payment settles it is missing the whole scope of this theft. Royalties are owed and continuously owed as these models are deployed and doing inference. How is it any different to paying a small pi…

If you steal a book and read it, should you have to pay every time you use the knowledge gained or recall parts of it from memory?

If I charged people for the privilege of listening to me recite relevant parts of the book to them for profit? Yes. Depending on the copyright.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#57

Post by teddyh »

kodt wrote: post #52
swader999 wrote: post #38

I take issue with the use of tense used in this framing. Its not 'infringed' its 'infringing' and to say that it happened is wrong, its happening and happening continuously in these models that are in use. To say a one time payment settles it is missing the whole scope of this theft. Royalties are owed and continuously owed as these models are deployed and doing inference. How is it any different to paying a small pi…

If you steal a book and read it, should you have to pay every time you use the knowledge gained or recall parts of it from memory?

No. People are not LLMs. And even if some argue that they are mechanically similar, they are legally distinct.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#58

Post by swader999 »

kodt wrote: post #52
swader999 wrote: post #38

I take issue with the use of tense used in this framing. Its not 'infringed' its 'infringing' and to say that it happened is wrong, its happening and happening continuously in these models that are in use. To say a one time payment settles it is missing the whole scope of this theft. Royalties are owed and continuously owed as these models are deployed and doing inference. How is it any different to paying a small pi…

If you steal a book and read it, should you have to pay every time you use the knowledge gained or recall parts of it from memory?

If I perform a song in public then yes, I should pay the creator every time I play it. I fail to see the difference here.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#59

Post by swader999 »

ronsor wrote: post #54
swader999 wrote: post #38

I take issue with the use of tense used in this framing. Its not 'infringed' its 'infringing' and to say that it happened is wrong, its happening and happening continuously in these models that are in use. To say a one time payment settles it is missing the whole scope of this theft. Royalties are owed and continuously owed as these models are deployed and doing inference. How is it any different to paying a small pi…

Royalties for inference are unrealistic in a way that even royalties for training aren't. The LLaMA models were released openly. Copies exist everywhere in the world. You aren't going to be able to charge someone for running `llama.cpp`; a court order ceases to have practical relevance at that point.

These models can provide citations so I don't see why they can't tick a royalty owed. I'm sure many here could help build this pipeline.

Re: Zuckerberg 'Personally Authorized and Encouraged' Meta's Copyright Infringement

#60

Post by teddyh »

0x3f wrote: post #32

HN really loves the copyright lobby when it's against someone they hate, huh

The problem is people at large companies creating these AI models, wanting the freedom to copy artists’ works when using it, but these large companies also want to keep copyright protection intact, for their regular business activities. They want to eat the cake and have it too. And they are arguing for essentially eliminating copyright for their specific purpose and convenience, when copyright has virtually never been loosened for the public’s convenience, even when the exceptions the public asks for are often minor and laudable. If these companies were to argue that copyright should be eliminated because of this new technology, I might not object. But now that they come and ask… no, they pretend to already have, a copyright exception for their specific use, I will happily turn around and use their own copyright maximalist arguments against them.

(Copied from a comment of mine written more than three years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33582047>)

Post reply on HN