Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
1–10 of 188 posts
Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#2Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#3How does this affect LLM systems that already have their corpus integrated?
Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#4Great. The stated goal of a lot of these companies seems to be “train the model on the output of humans, then hire us instead of the humans”.
It’s been interesting that media where watermarking has been feasible (like photography) have seen creators get access to some compensation, while text based creators get nothing.
Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#5Ross intelligence was creating a product that would directly compete against Thomson Reuters. Pretty clearly not fair use.
Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#6Thanks. The article wasn't loading for me, just the headline and image and footer. I was about to leave thinking that's all there is.
Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#7Great decision for humans.
Is this type of risk the reason why OpenAI masquerades as a non-profit?
Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#8Great. The stated goal of a lot of these companies seems to be “train the model on the output of humans, then hire us instead of the humans”. It’s been interesting that media where watermarking has been feasible (like photography) have seen creators get access to some compensation, while text based creators get nothing.
rotate similar [but different] fonts [or character pages] over each character.
the sequence represents data thus watermark.
Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#9> Thomson Reuters prevailed on two of the four factors, but Bibas described the fourth as the most important, and ruled that Ross “meant to compete with Westlaw by developing a market substitute.”
Yep. That's what people have been saying all along. If the intent is to substitute the original, then copying is not fair use.
But the problem is that the current method for training requires this volume of data. So the models are legitimately not viable without massive copyright infringement.
It'll be interesting to see how a defendant with a larger wallet will fare. But this doesn't look good.
Though big-picture, it seems to me that the money-ed interests will ensure that even if the current legal landscape doesn't allow LLM's to exist, then they will lobby HARD until it is allowed. This is inevitable now that it's at least partially framed in national security terms.
But I'd hope that this means there is a chance that if models have to train on all of human content, the weights will be available for free to all humans. If it requires massive copyright infringement on our content, we should all have an ownership stake in the resulting models.
Re: Thomson Reuters wins first major AI copyright case in the US
#10Thanks. The article wasn't loading for me, just the headline and image and footer. I was about to leave thinking that's all there is.
We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43018356.
Your post is totally fine; I just want to save space at the top of the thread (where the parent is now pinned).