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

341–350 of 654 posts

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

#341

Post by ivell »

Zambyte wrote: post #302
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

The correct way to legislate this is to abolish copyright. It is strictly a negative force. Nobody makes art because of copyright, only in spite of it.

People make art to also get recognized for that art. Otherwise they would keep that art secret at home.

Without copyright, anyone can copy the art and call it their own. What is then the incentive for the creator to share the art, if there is neither monetory gain and nor fame. And worse than them being recognized, they might even get accused of copying their own art if someone else became famous due to a copy.

Society would miss out a lot.

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

#342

Post by jstummbillig »

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

> There needs to be a royalty payment based on if the AI regurgitates existing ideas

This does not do enough to fix the root problem.

People who live right now, who happen to have written or produced anything that AI works with, build on the back of humanities combined knowledge, will become outsized beneficiaries of AI, with the AI wave offering new ways of monetizing their work – while everyone who has not, won't be.

It's simply not good enough. We have to make sure people broadly benefit first and foremost.

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

#343

Post by davidguetta »

smolder wrote: post #338
phire wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This settlement has basically nothing to do with LLMs. At least not as far as the courts are concerned. Alsup ruled [0] that feeding a book into an LLM is transformative and counts as fair use. Especially when they purchased a physical copy of the book, scanned it, and destroyed the original. But if I'm reading the ruling correctly, Anthropic might have been fine even with feeding pirated books into their LLM (as lon…

As far as I'm concerned, the courts are wrong, and training on ill gotten copyrighted material is not fair use. Given the clear value of highly trained LLMs, the investment they have taken on, and the amount of disruption to the existing economy they stand to make, in a just world, the people who created the training data deserve some level of compensation. I think, in the US, they are very afraid of falling behind C…

copyright is bullshit

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

#344

Post by thiht »

Honestly maybe (and just maybe) waiving copyrights on all the written content that ever existed to create training data would be a good thing to do, laws are made up so we can decide it’s a good trade off as a society. But:

1. I feel like this should be discussed globally, there should be a public debate, a vote, and guardrails

2. It should not be in the hands of private companies, it should either be done by the government and made available to the public ; or if it’s done by private companies they should be mandated to give the training data to the government so it’s available to the public.

My point is we can decide to say it’s ok because LLMs are too important strategically. But if we do so it should benefit the public, not 5 mega corporations, training data should be considered as public infrastructure, like roads, rails, or the electricity grid. Societies are failing and this is just one more nail in the coffin.

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

#345

Post by satvikpendem »

phire wrote: post #293
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

This settlement has basically nothing to do with LLMs. At least not as far as the courts are concerned. Alsup ruled [0] that feeding a book into an LLM is transformative and counts as fair use. Especially when they purchased a physical copy of the book, scanned it, and destroyed the original. But if I'm reading the ruling correctly, Anthropic might have been fine even with feeding pirated books into their LLM (as lon…

That's a good ruling, because otherwise only the big companies can afford to pay for enough content to make an LLM (say goodbye to open weight or research LLMs). Having a fee like this is actually a form of regulatory capture.

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

#346

Post by cataphract »

phire wrote: post #293
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

This settlement has basically nothing to do with LLMs. At least not as far as the courts are concerned. Alsup ruled [0] that feeding a book into an LLM is transformative and counts as fair use. Especially when they purchased a physical copy of the book, scanned it, and destroyed the original. But if I'm reading the ruling correctly, Anthropic might have been fine even with feeding pirated books into their LLM (as lon…

> But if I'm reading the ruling correctly, Anthropic might have been fine even with feeding pirated books into their LLM (as long as they planned to eventually deleted them afterwards)

The court says otherwise.

> Such piracy of otherwise available copies is inherently, irredeemably infringing even if the pirated copies are immediately used for the transformative use and immediately discarded.

Then it says it doesn't need to decide on that basis because they kept it not just for training LLMs, but also for building a central library. Which seems a bit ridiculous, because the sole purpose of the central library is to train LLMs.

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

#347

Post by newsclues »

Zambyte wrote: post #302
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

The correct way to legislate this is to abolish copyright. It is strictly a negative force. Nobody makes art because of copyright, only in spite of it.

What if copyrights are shorter, but vigorously defended (other than fair use provisions)?

Can we use the modern tech (AI) to policy copyright infringement, to liberate the culture and business?

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

#348

Post by satvikpendem »

smolder wrote: post #338
phire wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This settlement has basically nothing to do with LLMs. At least not as far as the courts are concerned. Alsup ruled [0] that feeding a book into an LLM is transformative and counts as fair use. Especially when they purchased a physical copy of the book, scanned it, and destroyed the original. But if I'm reading the ruling correctly, Anthropic might have been fine even with feeding pirated books into their LLM (as lon…

As far as I'm concerned, the courts are wrong, and training on ill gotten copyrighted material is not fair use. Given the clear value of highly trained LLMs, the investment they have taken on, and the amount of disruption to the existing economy they stand to make, in a just world, the people who created the training data deserve some level of compensation. I think, in the US, they are very afraid of falling behind C…

In that case AI should just be open source/weight. I don't agree with copyright in general but I see where you're coming from.

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

#349

Post by aetherspawn »

davidguetta wrote: post #343
smolder wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I'm concerned, the courts are wrong, and training on ill gotten copyrighted material is not fair use. Given the clear value of highly trained LLMs, the investment they have taken on, and the amount of disruption to the existing economy they stand to make, in a just world, the people who created the training data deserve some level of compensation. I think, in the US, they are very afraid of falling behind C…

copyright is bullshit

Copyright is what stops someone from copy+pasting a book that took years to write, then selling it $1 cheaper than the original author on Amazon or whatever and making a margin 1 million percent higher than the original author.

Imagine a society without copyright… only physically intensive jobs could make money because everything else would be pirated, ripped-off or free. Thus, only those who are financially independent could afford to publish. Because the world really needs more rich class propaganda…

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

#350

Post by satvikpendem »

lp4v4n wrote: post #308
phire wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This settlement has basically nothing to do with LLMs. At least not as far as the courts are concerned. Alsup ruled [0] that feeding a book into an LLM is transformative and counts as fair use. Especially when they purchased a physical copy of the book, scanned it, and destroyed the original. But if I'm reading the ruling correctly, Anthropic might have been fine even with feeding pirated books into their LLM (as lon…

It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission, right? It seems to be the modus operandi of corporations in general: they commit any kind of infringement they want and then later they go for a settlement with a value that's, of course, not too big for a company too big to fail. In the meantime, the average person or company gets shafted. In my opinion, we are one step away from AI companies capturing the entirety…

Paying this sort of fee in the first place is itself regulatory capture because only the big companies will be able to pay it. If they can pirate to make an LLM then so should us commoners be able to too.
Post reply on HN