OpenAI now tries to hide that ChatGPT was trained on copyrighted books, including J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series::A new research paper laid out ways in which AI developers should try and avoid showing LLMs have been trained on copyrighted material.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
7 points

are we no longer allowed to borrow books from friends?

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Yeah, but if you wanna act out the contents of the book and sell it as a movie, you need to buy the rights.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

yes, but that’s a different situation. with the LLM, the issue is that the text from copyrighted books are influencing the way it speaks. this is the same with humans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Yes but there’s a threshold of how much you need to copy before it’s an IP violation.

Copying a single word is usually only enough if it’s a neologism.
Two matching words in a row usually isn’t enough either.
At some point it is enough though and it’s not clear what that point is.

On the other hand it can still be considered an IP violation if there are no exact word matches but it seems sufficiently similar.

Until now we’ve basically asked courts to step in and decide where the line should be on a case by case basis.

We never set the level of allowable copying to 0, we set it to “reasonable”. In theory it’s supposed to be at a level that’s sufficient to, “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” (US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 8).

Why is it that with AI we take the extreme position of thinking that an AI that makes use of any information from humans should automatically be considered to be in violation of IP law?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Why is it that with AI we take the extreme position of thinking that an AI that makes use of any information from humans should automatically be considered to be in violation of IP law?

Luddites throwing their sabots into the machinery.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Making use of the information is not a violation – making use of that violation to turn a profit is a violation. AI software that is completely free for the masses without any paid upgrades can look at whatever it wants. As soon as a corporation is making money on it though, it’s in violation and needs to pay up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Not if your stories are transformative of the original work.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

AI works are not transformative. No new content is added.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

Mods remove this comment as this instance no longer tolerates discussions of piracy. We went through this last week

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 555K

    Comments