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

Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

garymarcus.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 64 posts

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#41

Post by MattPalmer1086 »

puppycodes wrote: post #29
card_zero wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if you own copyright for a song, you can claim licensing fees for any public performance of those lyrics. I wonder if an equivalent to Performance Rights Organizations will emerge as a channel for LLM publishers (so to speak) to pay fees.

and that is equally atrocious and should be eliminated from a society that wants to share ideas freely. Idk if your in the US but you also massively oversimplify in your example, copyright law is waaaaaaaay more complex than that and it would take a set of special circumstances way beyond doing what you say it siphon money from an infringment claim

A world without any legal protection for novel ideas or creative works is a world that does not share them freely.

That is why copyright law was originally created. Without it, there is little incentive to invest in the creation or disemmination of the works in the first place.

Edit: I am not defending the current form of those laws. The time period is too long for one thing. But removing it entirely would be a bad idea, IMHO.

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#42

Post by CamperBob2 »

verzali wrote: post #37
CamperBob2 wrote: post #3

(Shrug) We'll see what the courts say, Gary. If training AI doesn't constitute fair use, you will lose more than you could ever possibly hope to gain. As will the rest of us. Meanwhile, sublimate your dudgeon towards advocating for free access to the resulting models. That's what's important. Meta is not the company you want to go after here, since they released the resulting model weights.

Are you also willing to work for OpenAI for free then? Have you contacted them with such an offer?

As long as I have access to the resulting model, sure. I thought I made that clear. Copyright is not as important as reaching the next stage of our intellectual evolution. Current-gen AI may not be sufficient to reach that stage, but I believe it is a necessary step.

Like the author of this screed, my work went into training every major model. I get paid back every time one of those models helps me learn or do something. The injustice, if it happens, will occur when a few well-heeled players like OpenAI succeed in locking the technology up with regulatory capture or (worse) if a few greedy, myopic assholes render it illegal or uneconomical to continue development by advocating copyright maximalism.

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#43

Post by bigyabai »

bernb wrote: post #38
puppycodes wrote: post #26

i really dont get this and i personally beleive the world would be a better place without IP in any form. But also no one is selling "your book", the product is completely different in literally every conceivable way. you have never (and no one ever should) own words arranged in a certain way. You own the right to sell a book. Not the words themselves. meta does bad things and im not a fan, but this really pales in c…

Put 10,000 hours into writing a book. Watch somebody with more resources or media coverage take full credits for it and/or make money instead of yourself. Copyright is a good thing. Same principle applies to the core of similar laws.

Copyright can be a good or bad thing, it doesn't stop businesses from arguing fair/transformative use, and winning in many cases: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors_Guild,_Inc._v._Google,....

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#46

Post by thedevilslawyer »

ebiederm wrote: post #10
CamperBob2 wrote: post #3

(Shrug) We'll see what the courts say, Gary. If training AI doesn't constitute fair use, you will lose more than you could ever possibly hope to gain. As will the rest of us. Meanwhile, sublimate your dudgeon towards advocating for free access to the resulting models. That's what's important. Meta is not the company you want to go after here, since they released the resulting model weights.

To point out the obvious. Unauthorized copying (aka pirating) is definitely a copyright violation. That appears to be a huge problem with the large models and training. They don't secure legal access to the materials they train on, and thus fail to compensate authors for their work. AKA students are required to buy or otherwise obtain legal access to their text books(like checking the book out of the library). Traini…

And to point out the obvious - it seems training is not unauthorized copying. (At least this is the current legal status quo)

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#47

Post by thedevilslawyer »

verzali wrote: post #37
CamperBob2 wrote: post #3

(Shrug) We'll see what the courts say, Gary. If training AI doesn't constitute fair use, you will lose more than you could ever possibly hope to gain. As will the rest of us. Meanwhile, sublimate your dudgeon towards advocating for free access to the resulting models. That's what's important. Meta is not the company you want to go after here, since they released the resulting model weights.

Are you also willing to work for OpenAI for free then? Have you contacted them with such an offer?

It's like saying that because a student reads a textbook, they now have to work for the author for free?

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#48

Post by thedevilslawyer »

alanfranz wrote: post #5
CamperBob2 wrote: post #3

(Shrug) We'll see what the courts say, Gary. If training AI doesn't constitute fair use, you will lose more than you could ever possibly hope to gain. As will the rest of us. Meanwhile, sublimate your dudgeon towards advocating for free access to the resulting models. That's what's important. Meta is not the company you want to go after here, since they released the resulting model weights.

Does fair use imply that pirating copyrighted material is ok? I mean, it’s a serious question; I don’t see this as really connected. As long as an AI can “understand” the content of a book and spit out a summary of it, or even leverage what it learned to perform further inference, I’d be inclined to say that this is fair use; a human would do the same. But this has nothing to do with using pirated material for traini…

Fair use is literally that:

"Fair use" in copyright law allows limited, specific uses of copyrighted material without permission.

Hence, by definition, not "pirating".

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#49

Post by puppycodes »

bernb wrote: post #38
puppycodes wrote: post #26

i really dont get this and i personally beleive the world would be a better place without IP in any form. But also no one is selling "your book", the product is completely different in literally every conceivable way. you have never (and no one ever should) own words arranged in a certain way. You own the right to sell a book. Not the words themselves. meta does bad things and im not a fan, but this really pales in c…

Put 10,000 hours into writing a book. Watch somebody with more resources or media coverage take full credits for it and/or make money instead of yourself. Copyright is a good thing. Same principle applies to the core of similar laws.

but literally no one is doing that in this scenario so... huh? Also the number of hours you put into a thing does not make it valuable.

Re: Meta pirated at least 101 of my books, and others

#50

Post by MacsHeadroom »

ebiederm wrote: post #10
CamperBob2 wrote: post #3

(Shrug) We'll see what the courts say, Gary. If training AI doesn't constitute fair use, you will lose more than you could ever possibly hope to gain. As will the rest of us. Meanwhile, sublimate your dudgeon towards advocating for free access to the resulting models. That's what's important. Meta is not the company you want to go after here, since they released the resulting model weights.

To point out the obvious. Unauthorized copying (aka pirating) is definitely a copyright violation. That appears to be a huge problem with the large models and training. They don't secure legal access to the materials they train on, and thus fail to compensate authors for their work. AKA students are required to buy or otherwise obtain legal access to their text books(like checking the book out of the library). Traini…

Obtaining copies of pirated works is not infringement. Unauthorized sharing is infringement but being on the receiving end of sharing is not (even if one is an active participant).
Post reply on HN