Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

reuters.com

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#461

Reminds me a bit of the anecdote of Steve Jobs complaining about people ripping off the Mac GUI, in the mid to late 1980s, when he gave no public acknowledgement to the work done by Xerox on the Alto and Star operating system. "you're trying to rip off what I've already ripped off!" Crawl the whole Internet to build a gargantuan sized LLM and then complain you're being copied...

[deleted]

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#462

I am never even once hearing intellectual property or copyright claims from Anthropic, whose product depends entirely on having consumed all human output ever made regardless of those rights.

Exactly. They scraped the internet we all of us built with our own research, open source work, sharing, etc. I'm never going to agree that they own their models.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#463
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US labs do seem to have announced a lot of licensing deals though, and are buying things today due to the previous lawsuits. At what point will we be better to support a lab that pays (some) licenses today vs the ones that pay none? Some of the deals are in the hundreds of millions, so I suspect licensing is over a billion today? (Pure guess). That might become a big disadvantage in a price (or content) war.

I haven't seen any money, have you? Until they pay everyone or release weights theres really no change. Also they're doing this after they've already stolen. Not negotiated before

My understanding is that US labs now are paying for books, news and other content from media companies, but people in the middle (like blog authors) are left out by current courts over whether fair use applies. There's definitely an argument over whether we should tighten this, but they do seem to be under increasing pressure to be legal now by our existing interpretation. Most cases are still ongoing.

One reason people love the Chinese video models is that they seem to be trained on every hollywood movie/etc and they're not shy about letting you use famous actors/characters in them. That might be an increasing advantage because the US labs are now being cautious.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#464
post #408

Hypocrisy is a form of corruption. Anthropic's IP was created by harvesting and "distilling" other people's IP. Copyrighted materials, and the commons... which they have essentially privatized. The commercial goal is to avoid competition. One of the main worries for AI is "commoditization" which has come to mean "not a monopoly." To that end, it doesn't matter is the competitor is Chinese American or other. Their mot…

Bad China is stealing our stolen IP!

And putting it into free models like quen. It’s hard to care about this.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#465
post #408

Hypocrisy is a form of corruption. Anthropic's IP was created by harvesting and "distilling" other people's IP. Copyrighted materials, and the commons... which they have essentially privatized. The commercial goal is to avoid competition. One of the main worries for AI is "commoditization" which has come to mean "not a monopoly." To that end, it doesn't matter is the competitor is Chinese American or other. Their mot…

"Copyright violation of a published work" and "stealing private trade secrets" are in fact very different crimes. Humans have spent millenia harvesting and distilling each other's IP - "the shoulder of giants" and all that, so it's an especially disingenuous take.

For something to be a trade secret, you have to actually keep it secret. If I get the ingredients of Coca-cola from an ex-employee, I've stolen a trade secret. If I work it out by doing a chemical analysis, I've stolen nothing.

There is a difference with anthropic, as no-one signs a licence agreement to buy a coke. But Anthropic are also not saying you can't publish the output of their models. It's not clear to me if trade secret law will (or should) cover a secret which can be extracted from information that licensees are not restricted from publishing.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#468
post #334

> The strike by Alibaba is described as a "distillation" effort, which Anthropic has said involves training a less capable model on the outputs of a stronger one. I don't see what's wrong about this. > Anthropic said the campaign was conducted between April 22 and June 5, 2026, and generated more than 28.8 million exchanges with Claude through almost 25,000 fraudulent accounts. What makes the accounts fraudulent? If…

[dead]

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#469

I am never even once hearing intellectual property or copyright claims from Anthropic, whose product depends entirely on having consumed all human output ever made regardless of those rights.

If the data consumed (required to train such a model) is open source/openly available/public data somehow, then a majority of the revenue belongs to the public as well. Such as the philosophy behind the Norwegian oil fund etc.

Re: Anthropic says Alibaba illicitly extracted Claude AI model capabilities

#470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China aren't offering a cheaper solution. They are subsidizing an existing one (which is already subsidized) in order to gain foothold. In my economics classes, we were told that (in a "free market" argument) the best thing to do if a subsidy is making something you want cheaper is to use it. You're getting your thing, and at a reduced cost. (I'm not really replying to you per se, I'm curious how "free market" folk…

This is why I don't understand why people complain about impractically cheap Chinese solar panels. The rest of the world should buy enormous quantities and bankrupt the mofos and hugely benefit along the way. Then later they can set up their own solar panel industries.

Because they arent selling at a loss. The business pipeline is subsidized by the state. But end to end from mining the minerals to shipping you the solar panel everything is "in house". Its all in China. Thats why why can sell so cheap. Its even cheaper to make.

This narative that the CCP is just subsidizing all business to "beat america" is just dumb. Its the build process being made cheaper by the government. Not the final product.

Post reply on HN