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

Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 654 posts

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#221

Post by calgoo »

sdenton4 wrote: post #207
penguin_booze wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, continuing to profit--forever--from someone's else work, at scale, without their prior consent, is fair use? It's funny that crimes can be settled in cash. IOW, everything has a price; and the price is always right. Settlement ought to be the euphemism for blood money. In addition to the settlement, what I'd consider fair is to have these companies pay royalties in perpetuity. Of course, that's not tractable.

I dunno, ever used a thing you learned from a textbook in your job? Did you have to continue paying for the copy of that knowledge speed on your brain? No, because that's not what copyright is about. Learning from and building on previous work is civilization. Copyright maximalism is a plague.

Yes but does the computer actually learn? Is the computer a person that read a book and remembered, a part and used that to create a novel idea or is it just cioy pasting the answer and then reselling that

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#222

Post by simoncion »

sdenton4 wrote: post #207
penguin_booze wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, continuing to profit--forever--from someone's else work, at scale, without their prior consent, is fair use? It's funny that crimes can be settled in cash. IOW, everything has a price; and the price is always right. Settlement ought to be the euphemism for blood money. In addition to the settlement, what I'd consider fair is to have these companies pay royalties in perpetuity. Of course, that's not tractable.

I dunno, ever used a thing you learned from a textbook in your job? Did you have to continue paying for the copy of that knowledge speed on your brain? No, because that's not what copyright is about. Learning from and building on previous work is civilization. Copyright maximalism is a plague.

> I dunno, ever used a thing you learned from a textbook in your job? Did you have to continue paying for the copy of that knowledge speed on your brain?

Those regulations and principles are for humans.

Either the major LLMs are software tools deployed by ostensibly-profit-seeking companies, and regulations based on the notion that "making humans pay to make use of the things they've learned is profoundly antisocial" don't apply, or the LLM companies have a bigass swarm of unpaid -er- "servants", and labor laws and other human rights regulations do apply.

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#223

Post by monooso »

dyauspitr wrote: post #210
bigbuppo wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, man, sure they cleaned out the vault, but the valuable insights gained for how to keep it from happening again are priceless!

I want it to happen again. Copyright is important but I want someone that does tremendous good to be able to fall into a grey area where they’re given a free pass. But only on a case by case basis. Keep the lines fuzzy. That way we get to defend copyright but someone extraordinary also has a ray of hope of getting away with subverting it.

> Keep the lines fuzzy. That way we get to defend copyright but someone extraordinary also has a ray of hope of getting away with subverting it.

That's a very charitable way of saying "someone with deep enough pockets can ignore the law and get away with it."

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#225

Post by gspr »

sdenton4 wrote: post #207
penguin_booze wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, continuing to profit--forever--from someone's else work, at scale, without their prior consent, is fair use? It's funny that crimes can be settled in cash. IOW, everything has a price; and the price is always right. Settlement ought to be the euphemism for blood money. In addition to the settlement, what I'd consider fair is to have these companies pay royalties in perpetuity. Of course, that's not tractable.

I dunno, ever used a thing you learned from a textbook in your job? Did you have to continue paying for the copy of that knowledge speed on your brain? No, because that's not what copyright is about. Learning from and building on previous work is civilization. Copyright maximalism is a plague.

> I dunno, ever used a thing you learned from a textbook in your job? Did you have to continue paying for the copy of that knowledge speed on your brain?

They are, presumably, human. We can perfectly well say that humans have certain rights without needing to give machines those same rights.

For example, we've more or less all agreed that it's fine for a human to watch a movie and enjoy the memories forever, and be inspired by it forever. But we've also more or less all agreed that that doesn't mean that a human can use a machine to record that movie and keep it forever.

> Learning from and building on previous work is civilization. Copyright maximalism is a plague.

The debate has existed for several generations at this point. You may disagree with the mainstream opinion, but it's disingenuous to frame it as "copyright maximalism".

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#226

Post by shakna »

sdenton4 wrote: post #207
penguin_booze wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, continuing to profit--forever--from someone's else work, at scale, without their prior consent, is fair use? It's funny that crimes can be settled in cash. IOW, everything has a price; and the price is always right. Settlement ought to be the euphemism for blood money. In addition to the settlement, what I'd consider fair is to have these companies pay royalties in perpetuity. Of course, that's not tractable.

I dunno, ever used a thing you learned from a textbook in your job? Did you have to continue paying for the copy of that knowledge speed on your brain? No, because that's not what copyright is about. Learning from and building on previous work is civilization. Copyright maximalism is a plague.

Well, as not every book is a textbook, I'd say quite a lot of what I've read never went to any kind of knowledge in my head at all. But I reckon the author still deserves to eat.

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#227

Post by theplumber »

JAlexoid wrote: post #184
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

right, the thread you responded to is asking why there hasn't been a parallel criminal suit

Maybe because Anthropic isn't actively facilitating copyright infringement?..

How is not? Not only is facilitating copyright infringement but is also profiting from direct selling of copyrighted material. “Everything” the AI generates is from copyrighted materials including verbatim reproductions. Sora was even more obvious.

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#228

Post by adastra22 »

dataflow wrote: post #169
tzs wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alsup is an interesting judge. He has handled several important tech cases, such as Oracle v Google, and Waymo v Uber. He's also a longtime hobbyist programmer working in BASIC, much of it in support of his ham radio hobby. Screenshots of his shortwave propagation prediction program here [1]. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/19/16503076/oracle-vs-googl...

He learned Java to understand the Oracle v. Google case better. His middle name is Haskell.

And his name, if you need glasses like me, looks like AI slop.

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#229

Post by modo_mario »

ilamont wrote: post #21

If you have the time, read the judge's response to the motion: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.43... The big deal for publishers and authors is the payout per eligible title is $3k. For a traditional publishing contract involving one author, the amount will be split down the middle. The other thing which caught my eye is the judge slashed the class counsel's fee by half, from 12.5% ($187.5m)…

>The class counsel's unreimbursed litigation expenses were $2.6m.

In what sane state does it even get that high?

Re: Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement for pirated books used to train Claude

#230

Post by chvid »

nikanj wrote: post #211
sashank_1509 wrote: post #200

A one time payment like 1.5B doesn’t do anything. There needs to be a royalty payment based on if the AI regurgitates existing ideas. That is probably the correct way to legislate this. If anything a human does can instantly be copied by an LLM, and then sent to all its subscribers, things need to change

It doesn't do anything? Au contraire! Now the creations of the LLMs stand on legal ground. This was an excellent deal for Anthropic

It is legal to train LLMs on books but illegal to train on output of LLMs.

Perfect - an absolute steal for 1.5B.

Post reply on HN