“Established copyright doctrine will dictate that the Times cannot prevent AI models from acquiring knowledge about facts, any more than another news organization can prevent the Times itself from re-reporting stories it had no role in investigating,” OpenAI writes.
Oh boy, their defense is that their advanced predictive text can acquire knowledge? Please, proceed.
It still is defensible. I can quote a whole bunch of lines from “talladega nights” and “old school” verbatim. I can sing the entirety of “Amish paradise”, with close to 100% accuracy.
My recall ability does not mean that I’ve violated copyright.
This doesn’t matter. You personally reciting movie quotes as a private individual is fair use. OpenAI’s ChatGPT has a commercial purpose, and you could say it does compete with The NY Times.
Only indirectly - as in airplanes competing with cars. And the law generally encourages that type of competition as it leads to substantial innovation and economic growth.
That's like saying amazon and mom and pop gift shops don't compete. Like yeah, a lot of people will still prefer the atmosphere and curation of the mom and pop shop but that doesn't fucking matter when the vast majority of people just use Amazon, driving the shop out of business. This despite the fact that Amazon is more general and only competes indirectly.
Do you have paying customers that ask you for movie scripts and song lyrics like OpenAi does? If so, the above would be flat out copyright infringement.
What does that have to do with copyright infringement though? And how would it be illegal?
I could totally start a website, maybe call it "New York Stories", read every news article about New York (I'd get a lot of them from NYT) and then working off my own memory, not copy/pasting the text write/publish the same story. That would not be copyright infringement. In fact the NYT themselves do it all the time, publishing things that were originally reported elsewhere. You're allowed to do that as long as you don't produce exact copies.
LLMs generally don't do exact copies of anything - they're just not exact at all. If you ask the AI exactly the same question a thousand times, you won't get precisely the same exact response twice.
For example asking "What should I eat in New York?" gave me:
New York City offers a vast array of culinary experiences, reflecting its diverse culture. Here's a mix of iconic eats and modern must-tries:
Pizza: New York-style pizza is famous worldwide. Visit classic spots like Di Fara, Lombardi's, or newer favorites like Lucali for a slice of this iconic dish.
Bagels and Lox: New York bagels are [... several more paragraphs ...]
Then the same question again:
New York City is a melting pot of cultures, making it one of the best places in the world to explore a wide variety of cuisines. Here are some iconic foods and places to consider when deciding what to eat in New York:
Pizza: New York-style pizza is famous worldwide. Look for places with a long history and great reviews, such as Lombardi's (America's first pizzeria), Di Fara Pizza, or Joe's Pizza for a classic slice.
Bagels: Another iconic New York [...]
It's approximately the same response but not exactly the same and even recommends different restaurants.
Being exact matters when it comes to copyright infringement. Like OpenAI I'm genuinely curious how they got it to output a verbatim copy of anything. That's highly unusual behaviour and if they had reported it to the company I'm sure it would have been fixed. Just like if someone posted an exact copy of an NYT article in this community it would be removed and nobody would be taken to court.
That's a classic question with a touch of irony, isn't it? The phrase "What's so civil about war anyway?" is often used to point out the oxymoron in the term "civil war." The term "civil" implies politeness and order, which is in stark contrast to the chaos and destruction characteristic of war. This line, made famous by the Guns N' Roses song "Civil War," captures the absurdity and tragedy of war, especially when it occurs within the same country among its citizens. It's a rhetorical question that highlights the inherent contradiction in waging war in the name of civility or resolving internal disputes. So, in essence, there's nothing "civil" about war—it's a critique wrapped in a bit of wordplay.
Civil war refers to a war between two or more ideologies or groups belonging to the same country. The only civil thing about it is the lack of WMDs and even that isn't a certainty.
You know, in a way I am glad that we managed to implement such a piss poor implementation of a PiRaCy ShIeLd. They are going to have to roll back or disable this piece of crap in a matter of days and that will hopefully be the end of these silly internet restrictions for good.
Had the implementation not sucked ass this bad, we would have needed to wait for some EU infringiment procedure or ECJ order to shut it down. Instead, this way it's gonna end way more quickly.
Do they? I think most of Lemmy still prefers online freedom, it should be one of the reasons that brought us here. Plus, the people you are gonna meet even by changing instance are going to be more or less the same. The number of instances you are barred from by staying on .world is pretty small.
I didn't wanna say go back to reddit but... Not that the people there are better, but it's easier to find a competent niche and dismiss bad ideas as unimportant.
You're right that Lemmy should prefer "online freedom". That's what makes it so hard to bear, or to dismiss.
I mean, you shouldn't stay on here if you don't like it, that goes without saying, but I think all in all the benefits outweight the few very annoying issues that this platform has. For instance, I think that the smaller number of people tend to mean that if you leave a comment somewhere you are likely to find someone to chat with and discuss whatever it is that you brought up in your comment.
Often times on Reddit there are so many comments that you either blow up getting over 20 replies or get forgotten and ignored. No inbetweens.
I think most of Lemmy still prefers online freedom, it should be one of the reasons that brought us here.
There are two kinds of freedom that brought people to Lemmy.
One is the freedom of user expression from corporate control, which is the freedom that drug me away from Reddit.
The other is the freedom to be fascist assholes who can espouse their love for command-economy dictatorships, viewpoints that aren't acceptable on other parts of the "clear" web. Many do still get filtered out but many do still get through.
Watch "storage" needs becoming s societal issue that will need taxpayer money because they store 1GB of data every time I look up how many pickles I should put in my hamburger. Assholes. They already consume an insane amount of energy.
The plaintiffs have always maintained that they don’t intend to pursue legal action against the targeted Redditors. Instead, they’re seeking information to support their lawsuits against RCN and other Internet providers.
The motion to compel shows that the movie companies are seeking the following information from Mr. S, who is not necessarily the Redditor:
All written communications with RCN concerning piracy from Oct. 1, 2017 to the present.
Payment records to RCN from Oct. 1, 2017 to present.
All personal computing records pertaining to usage of BitTorrent from Oct. 1, 2017 to the present.
All social media account usernames used including for Reddit, Twitter and Facebook January 1, 2016 to present.
All Reddit posts and messages from Jan. 1, 2016 to the present
Records of all movie piracy websites (including but not limited to YTS, 1337x, RARBG, Torrent Galaxy, The PirateBay) that were used at your Internet service.
I get that money can be tight but to avoid such situation (at a personal level) regarding piracy. things to note.
don't talk/post about how that you pirated any media, or face potential legal risks.
movies companies might not like it yet it's not illegal to tell people how to pirate a movie. Don't hint that you did it yourself though.
Reddit doesn't have to provide any info to them, i'm assuming the film companies wanted the scoop from Reddit for free. What if they pay Reddid? who knows..
The way things are going over there Sputz will probably hand everything over as long as they invest. I still remember when the canary quietly went away.
The sad part is, a few years ago I gladly paid for the Disney Hulu bundle along with HBO. Now it's all gone to shit and they never even improved the Disney Plus app. My subscription payments are long gone and I'm better off for it.
If I can pay a single reasonable fee and have access to literally everything, I do.
If I could do that without having to go through the effort of finding everything myself, I would absolutely pay for that. I used to stream because it was better. I can’t afford that now though, and not everything is even available.
torrentfreak.com
Hot