Here is how individuals are treated for massive copyright infringement: https://investors.autodesk.com/news-releases/news-release-de...
copyright is not the same as piracy
Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
151–160 of 686 posts
Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#152I'm not seeing how this is fair use in either case.
Someone correct me if I am wrong but aren't these works being digitized and transformed in a way to make a profit off of the information that is included in these works?
It would be one thing for an individual to make person use of one or more books, but you got to have some special blindness not to see that a for-profit company's use of this information to improve a for-profit model is clearly going against what copyright stands for.
Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We've held China accountable for counterfeiting products for decades and regulated their exports We have? Are we from different multi-verses? The one I've lived in to date has not done anything against Chinese counterfeits beyond occasionally seizing counterfeit goods during import. But that's merely occasionally enforcing local counterfeit law, a far cry from punishing the entity producing it. As a matter of fact,…
I was gonna say, the enforcement is so weak that it's not even really worth it to pursue consumer hardware here in the US. Make product that is a hit, patent it, and still 1 month later IYTUOP will be selling an identical copy for 1/3rd the price on Amazon.
Patent enforcement requires the patent holder to go after violators. The said thing is, there are grounds to sue Amazon facilitating it, just nobody has had the money to do it. And no big company ever will because of the threat of being locked out of AWS.
It's quite the mafia operation over at Amazon.
Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#154The farce of treating a corporation as an individual precludes common sense legal procedure to investigate people who are responsible for criminal action taken by the company. Its obviously premeditated and in all ways an illicit act knowingly perpetrated by persons. The only discourse should be about upending this penthouse legalism.
The irony is that actually litigating copyright law would lead to the repeal of said copyright law. And so in all cases of backwaters laws that are used to "protect interests" of "corporations" yet criminalize petty individual cases.
This of course cannot be allowed to happen, so the the legal system is just a limbo, a bar which regular individuals must strain to pass under but that corporations regularly overstep.
Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
poverty mindset. We can make more books, and now these copies contribute to a corpus of knowledge that far more people benefit from
Wasteful mindset. They don't need the books, they need the data. They should never have been printed if they were going to he destroyed.
Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#156Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#157Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#158Here is how individuals are treated for massive copyright infringement: https://investors.autodesk.com/news-releases/news-release-de...
copyright is not the same as piracy
Can you explain why? What makes them categorically different or at the very least why is "piracy" quantitatively worse than 'just' copyright violation?
Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#159Pirate and pay the fine is probably hell of a lot cheaper than individually buying all these books. I'm not saying this is justified, but what would you have done in their situation? Sayi "they have the money" is not an argument. It's about the amount of effort that is needed to individually buy, scan, process millions of pages. If that's done for you, why re-do it all?
Just downloading them is of course cheaper, but it is worth pointing out that, as the article states, they did also buy legitimate copies of millions of books. (This includes all the books involved in the lawsuit.) Based on the judgement itself, Anthropic appears to train only on the books legitimately acquired. Used books are quite cheap, after all, and can be bought in bulk.
Buying a book is not license to re-sell that content for your own profit. I can't buy a copy of your book, make a million Xeroxes of it and sell those. The license you get when you buy a book is for a single use, not a license to do what ever you want with the contents of that book.
Re: Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge
#160Two of the top AI companies flouted ethics with regard to training data. In OpenAI's case, the whistleblower probably got whacked for exposing it.
Can anyone make a compelling argument that any of these AI companies have the public's best interest in mind (alignment/superalignment)?