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

Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 160 posts

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#141

Post by thisislife2 »

grayhatter wrote: post #131
reorder9695 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's legal to train an "intelligence" on everything for free based on fair use, but it's not legal to train another intelligence (my brain) on it?

No, it's also not illegal to train your brain. If you break into a store, and read all the books, you'll get arrested for breaking and entering. Not for reading the books. My (superficial) take on the argument is that they're hoping by saying "it's not illegal to read" no one will notice, and no one will ask how they got into the book store to begin with.

So why is it illegal to download a pirated copy of a book from the internet to "train" my brain? There's no breaking and entering there, right?

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#142

Post by theragra »

thisislife2 wrote: post #141
grayhatter wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's also not illegal to train your brain. If you break into a store, and read all the books, you'll get arrested for breaking and entering. Not for reading the books. My (superficial) take on the argument is that they're hoping by saying "it's not illegal to read" no one will notice, and no one will ask how they got into the book store to begin with.

So why is it illegal to download a pirated copy of a book from the internet to "train" my brain? There's no breaking and entering there, right?

Because you are making a copy? Moreover, in some jurisdictions only uploading is illegal. Downloading is fine.

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#143

Post by laterium »

godelski wrote: post #71
threethirtytwo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does make sense. It’s controversial. Your memory memorizes things in the same way. So what nvidia does here is no different, the AI doesn’t actually copy any of the books. To call training illegal is similar to calling reading a book and remembering it illegal. Our copyright laws are nowhere near detailed enough to specify anything in detail here so there is indeed a logical and technical inconsistency here. I can…

You need to pay for the books before you memorize them

You can sit down at a library or Barnes and Noble and memorize for free.

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#144

Post by tremon »

Arnt wrote: post #138
reorder9695 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's legal to train an "intelligence" on everything for free based on fair use, but it's not legal to train another intelligence (my brain) on it?

You're close to an important point. Our current laws are written to make it legal for you to copy the Quran via your brain — some people learn it by rote and can stand up and speak the entire work from one end to the other. This is intended to be legal. Fair use of the Quran. I went to a concert recently where someone copied every word and (as far as I could hear) every note from a copyrighted work by Bruce Springste…

> I went to a concert recently where someone copied every word and (as far as I could hear) every note from a copyrighted work by Bruce Springsteen. Singing and playing. This too is intended to be fair use.

Only the learning part is fair use. Playing an artist's songs in public does not violate the copyright of the original performing artist, but it does violate the songwriters' copyright, and you do need a license to play covers in public.

They're called Performing Rights: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performing_rights

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#145

Post by grayhatter »

thisislife2 wrote: post #141
grayhatter wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's also not illegal to train your brain. If you break into a store, and read all the books, you'll get arrested for breaking and entering. Not for reading the books. My (superficial) take on the argument is that they're hoping by saying "it's not illegal to read" no one will notice, and no one will ask how they got into the book store to begin with.

So why is it illegal to download a pirated copy of a book from the internet to "train" my brain? There's no breaking and entering there, right?

The answer is in the name of the law, copyright, the right to produce a copy. The original, ethical intent behind the law was to encourage people to create things. Someone could invest time and money into creating some art that had value, and then they were given the exclusive right to monetize it for some amount of time. You could create something, and I'm not allowed to copy what you created, and sell it without your permission, preventing me from doing no work but capturing all the money you could reasonably make off your work.

Want to create a song? You're the only person allowed to make, or authorize people to duplicate it. You're the only person allowed to control the supply of your effort. Eventually, the public good, and interest was supposed to take over, because in the end, you're right, it's just information. It was supposed to enter "the public domain" where anyone could freely use it. But then Disney got involved, and now it's a toxified weapon used mostly by unethical lawyers against curiosity.

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#146

Post by lencastre »

skilled wrote: post #3

> In response, NVIDIA defended its actions as fair use, noting that books are nothing more than statistical correlations to its AI models. Does this even make sense? Are the copyright laws so bad that a statement like this would actually be in NVIDIA’s favor?

I would love to see these nvidia designs as mere statistical correlations of graphic card design.

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#147

Post by threethirtytwo »

codedokode wrote: post #139
threethirtytwo wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You had to do this for reading too. The words were burned onto your retina as volatile memory before getting processed by your brain. You retina likely overwrote it's "memory" as soon as you looked at something else, but that's no different than copying and deleting or the more apt analogy: streaming.

The law makes a distinction between storing it on a disk and just remembering the content. The latter is not a "copy" and not a subject of law: > “Copies” are material objects, other than phonorecords, in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device. The term “co…

Interesting. How long is the transitory duration? The interpretation of that likely has yet to be determined by a court case and can evolve similar to how “all men are created equal” doesn’t just refer to men.

Seems to me a possible interpretation is just deleting the data after training is finished.

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#148

Post by Arnt »

tremon wrote: post #144
Arnt wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're close to an important point. Our current laws are written to make it legal for you to copy the Quran via your brain — some people learn it by rote and can stand up and speak the entire work from one end to the other. This is intended to be legal. Fair use of the Quran. I went to a concert recently where someone copied every word and (as far as I could hear) every note from a copyrighted work by Bruce Springste…

> I went to a concert recently where someone copied every word and (as far as I could hear) every note from a copyrighted work by Bruce Springsteen. Singing and playing. This too is intended to be fair use. Only the learning part is fair use. Playing an artist's songs in public does not violate the copyright of the original performing artist, but it does violate the songwriters' copyright, and you do need a license t…

It can also violate other laws and rules that are not relevant to copyright. Perhaps I should have digressed into listing that? I chose not to.

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#149

Post by godelski »

threethirtytwo wrote: post #134
godelski wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great! Then it's perfectly legal. As long as you obtain the books legally then it's legal This really isn't that hard

So you’re wrong when you said you have to pay for the books. You don’t.

You should go be a lawyer.

For the rest of us, we understand context

Re: Nvidia contacted Anna's Archive to access books

#150

Post by godelski »

laterium wrote: post #143
godelski wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to pay for the books before you memorize them

You can sit down at a library or Barnes and Noble and memorize for free.

You should read the sibling comments before leaving your unique "contribution"
Post reply on HN