More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
1–10 of 68 posts
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#2Do cliff notes of books and plays infringe/need a license? If so, that seems like they’d have a possible case. Maybe. If not, well… maybe openAI infringed by not buying their original copy, but not sure that feeding it into a bunch of math is going to be copyright infringement.
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#3I'm miffed. I tried a couple characters from my books, and zilch:
===== who is dan markunas
ChatGPT I'm sorry, but I don't have any information on a person named Dan Markunas in my database ....
who is janet saunders ChatGPT I'm sorry, but I don't have any specific information about a person named Janet Saunders in my database,
===========
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#4Do cliff notes of books and plays infringe/need a license? If so, that seems like they’d have a possible case. Maybe. If not, well… maybe openAI infringed by not buying their original copy, but not sure that feeding it into a bunch of math is going to be copyright infringement.
> the system can accurately summarize their works and generate text that mimics their styles
Cliff notes is not what lets you replicate the style of the author etc.
And yeah, you can use "it's just feeding it into a bunch of math" to justify nearly anything that involves software including good old piracy. What matters is what math is used for. (Spoiler: line up Microsoft's pockets at the expense of actual writers in this case.)
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#5Do cliff notes of books and plays infringe/need a license? If so, that seems like they’d have a possible case. Maybe. If not, well… maybe openAI infringed by not buying their original copy, but not sure that feeding it into a bunch of math is going to be copyright infringement.
> the system can accurately summarize their works and generate text that mimics their styles Cliff notes is not what lets you replicate the style of the author etc. And yeah, you can use "it's just feeding it into a bunch of math" to justify nearly anything that involves software including good old piracy. What matters is what math is used for. (Spoiler: line up Microsoft's pockets at the expense of actual writers in…
Not at all like piracy.
When someone pirates a book, they're replacing the original without consent or remuneration to the copyright holders.
When you train an AI on the contents of a book, you're not replacing it. If someone is interested in the content, they still need to buy it. Using ChatGPT is not a substitute. If it is, they're gonna have to prove it in court, but I doubt they'll be able to.
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#6Random thought: my blog is licensed under a Creative Commons license [1] that allows you to use and transform my content as long as you give attribution and distribute your contributions under the same terms.
I found the OpenAI bot scraping my blog recently. Assuming they used that data, when will they attribute me?
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the system can accurately summarize their works and generate text that mimics their styles Cliff notes is not what lets you replicate the style of the author etc. And yeah, you can use "it's just feeding it into a bunch of math" to justify nearly anything that involves software including good old piracy. What matters is what math is used for. (Spoiler: line up Microsoft's pockets at the expense of actual writers in…
Not at all like piracy. When someone pirates a book, they're replacing the original without consent or remuneration to the copyright holders. When you train an AI on the contents of a book, you're not replacing it. If someone is interested in the content, they still need to buy it. Using ChatGPT is not a substitute. If it is, they're gonna have to prove it in court, but I doubt they'll be able to.
If you can ask ChatGPT about any book contents, you don't need to get the book, and if you don't need to get the book then author got robbed, ClosedAI/MS profited.
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#8Random thought: my blog is licensed under a Creative Commons license [1] that allows you to use and transform my content as long as you give attribution and distribute your contributions under the same terms. I found the OpenAI bot scraping my blog recently. Assuming they used that data, when will they attribute me? [1] https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
> Assuming they used that data...
That's the key part. You haven't yet proved they have actually used your content for anything (other than, potentially, read the license to decide if they should include or discard from their training set).
But in practice we'll never know for sure if they are respecting the terms of licenses until 1) this is tested in court, or 2) there's some internal leak that points into either direction.
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not at all like piracy. When someone pirates a book, they're replacing the original without consent or remuneration to the copyright holders. When you train an AI on the contents of a book, you're not replacing it. If someone is interested in the content, they still need to buy it. Using ChatGPT is not a substitute. If it is, they're gonna have to prove it in court, but I doubt they'll be able to.
If you can ask ChatGPT about any book contents, you don't need to get the book, and if you don't need to get the book then author got robbed, ClosedAI/MS profited.
This reminds me of the tenuous RIAA claim that every pirated piece of media represented a lost sale back when they were suing their customers in the 2000s.
Re: More writers sue OpenAI for copyright infringement over AI training
#10Do cliff notes of books and plays infringe/need a license? If so, that seems like they’d have a possible case. Maybe. If not, well… maybe openAI infringed by not buying their original copy, but not sure that feeding it into a bunch of math is going to be copyright infringement.
> the system can accurately summarize their works and generate text that mimics their styles Cliff notes is not what lets you replicate the style of the author etc. And yeah, you can use "it's just feeding it into a bunch of math" to justify nearly anything that involves software including good old piracy. What matters is what math is used for. (Spoiler: line up Microsoft's pockets at the expense of actual writers in…
Copyright doesn't protect style or genre [1], so these suits seem destined to fail. That said, it seems like it is time to reexamine those laws in light of current technology before it kills off creative works.
https://creativecommons.org/2023/03/23/the-complex-world-of-....