Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

nytimes.com

521–530 of 761 posts

Re: Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

#521

So the article notes Anthropic states they never publicly released a frontier model that was trained on the downloaded copyright material. So were Claude 2 and 3 only trained on legally purchased and scanned books, or do they now use a different training system that does not rely on books at all ?

I assumed they were literally just lying.

Re: Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

#522
post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing#Legal_aspect...

In all those countries what’s illegal is abuse of a monopoly, which is not what’s being discussed here. The parent cited Uber and Lyft when they first started. Nothing is illegal about startups undercutting established competitors.

I can only speak in EU terms in any more detail here, but the EU laws are based on "dominant market position". Monopoly is one route to that but it's not the only route and there is no minimum market share required, as e.g. Qualcomm found out (https://www.cliffordchance.com/insights/resources/blogs/talk...)

Re: Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

#523
post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing#Legal_aspect...

In all those countries what’s illegal is abuse of a monopoly, which is not what’s being discussed here. The parent cited Uber and Lyft when they first started. Nothing is illegal about startups undercutting established competitors.

No you’re missing the point.

They acquired market power by killing them through predatory pricing, leaving incumbents unprofitable and forcing them to exit - while creating a steep barrier to entry for any new comers and strategically manipulating existing riders by offering high take rates initially and subsidising rides to create artificial demand and inflate market share - then once they kicked out the incumbents, they exercised their market power to raise prices and their % of the take rate of each transaction; leaving consumers and riders worse off.

We can talk all day about the nice UX blah blah. But the reality is, financially, they could not have succeeded without a very dubious and unethical approach.

Re: Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

#524
post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which in my opionion is exactly what is wrong with practices like these. What's actually wrong with this? They paid $1.5B for a bunch of pirated books. Seems like a fair price to me, but what do I know. The settlement should reflect society's belief of the cost or deterrent, I'm not sure which (maybe both). This might be controversial, but I think a free society needs to let people break the rules if they are willi…

Should I be allowed to walk into the Louvre, steal the Mona Lisa, then pay $10.000 once caught? Should I be allowed to do this if I am employed by Stealing The Mona Lisa, LLC? > They paid $1.5B for a bunch of pirated books. They didn't pay, they settled . And considering flesh-and-blood people get sued for tens of thousands per download when there isn't a profit motive, that's a bargain. > The settlement should refle…

And to top it off, the money they pay is VC money that is created from nothing in ”valuations”. So in the end nobody paid anything for this crime.

Re: Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

#525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In all those countries what’s illegal is abuse of a monopoly, which is not what’s being discussed here. The parent cited Uber and Lyft when they first started. Nothing is illegal about startups undercutting established competitors.

No you’re missing the point. They acquired market power by killing them through predatory pricing, leaving incumbents unprofitable and forcing them to exit - while creating a steep barrier to entry for any new comers and strategically manipulating existing riders by offering high take rates initially and subsidising rides to create artificial demand and inflate market share - then once they kicked out the incumbents,…

Okay but is that illegal?

Re: Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

#527
This settlement highlights the growing pains of the AI industry as it scales rapidly. While $1.5B is significant, it's a fraction of Anthropic's valuation and funding. It underscores the need for better governance in AI development to avoid future legal pitfalls. Interesting to see how this affects their competition with OpenAI.

Re: Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

#529
post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And thank god they did. There was no perfectly legal channel to fix the taxi cartel And instead Uber offloaded everything onto gig workers and society. And still lost 20 billion dollars in the process (price dumping isn't cheap).

“Society” should have things like universal healthcare like every other industrial country in the world. The US is the only country with an ass backwards system where you are dependent on your employer for health benefits.

It’s by design.. America is all about using you up as an asset then discarding you when you are no longer productive and generate economic benefits.

I always laugh when Americans poke fun at Europeans… we have it much better over here. I assure you of that.

Re: Anthropic agrees to pay $1.5B to settle lawsuit with book authors

#530
Smart move: now that they're an established player, and that they have a few billions of investors' money to spend, they comfort a jurisprudence that stealing IP to train your models is a billion dollar offense.

What a formidable moat against newcomers, definitely worth the price!

Post reply on HN