this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023

510 points (95.9% liked)

Technology

63010 readers

4996 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

510

George R.R. Martin and other authors sue OpenAI for copyright infringement (www.theverge.com)

submitted 1 year ago by Voyager@psychedelia.ink to c/technology@lemmy.world

141 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

According to the complaint, OpenAI “copied plaintiffs’ works wholesale, without permission or consideration” and fed the copyrighted materials into large language models.

The authors added that OpenAI’s LLMs could result in derivative work “that is based on, mimics, summarizes, or paraphrases” their books, which could harm their market.

OpenAI, the complaint said, could have trained GPT on works in the public domain instead of pulling in copyrighted material without paying a licensing fee.

This is the latest lawsuit against OpenAI from popular authors — Martin wrote Game of Thrones, Grisham’s many books have been turned into films, and so on — alleging copyright infringement.

Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay writer Michael Chabon and others sued the company for using their books to train GPT earlier in September.

Comedian Sarah Silverman and authors Christopher Golden and Richard Kadrey also sought legal action against OpenAI and Meta, while Paul Tremblay and Mona Awad filed their complaint in June.

The original article contains 323 words, the summary contains 157 words. Saved 51%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Jocker@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hypothetically, I bought a kindle copy of GoT shared it with my AI friend John who has no intention to publish a 1:1 copy of the book, but we chat about the story and maybe about how it should end.. Is it wrong? Where?

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The problem I have in this analogy is that people want to treat AI as a person who "consumes" media, but not as a person that "creates" media

IMO, an AI isn't consuming and isn't creating, it's just a tool, albeit one that definitely threatens established markets.

[–] Jocker@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Aren't we all the products of our experiences, so when we generate something, it too is inspired from something else that already exists! So, are we against AI because it's not a human? If it was a cat reading the book and doing the same, will the cat be sued too?

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, are we against AI because it’s not a human?

No, "we" are against AI because it threatens private ownership, both copyright ownership and ownership over further productive forces.

Personally, I think everyone should be paid for the increased productivity allowed through automation (including AI), and not just those who own those means of production. People who are ostensibly angry over GPT "stealing" creative works are really angry about private ownership, but that sounds too much like communism so most people are content to yell about copyright infringement.

[–] Jocker@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

because it threatens private ownership, both copyright ownership and ownership over further productive forces. Every creator has the right to copyright their creation, if it isn't infringing other copyrights, and AI does too, but may be not until AI becomes capable of making it's own decision in these matters aka AGI (and definitely the owner/creator of the AI doesn't have the right either! They're just the infrastructure business)

You're right, everyone should benefit from AI! And Socialism is the only way AI fits in the civilization. AI economically is a slavery of mechanical brain that's infinitely skilled and scalable. And it's too much power for anyone to hold. And ironically, I have read the same in a blog by Sam Altman couple of years ago, when he wasn't as much evil as now.

I suggest people act for the democratization of AI, an AI benefit everyone movement instead of resisting the technology.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Idk if you intended to misquote me there, but I definitely take issue with "every creator has the right to copyright their creation, if it isn't infringing other copyrights, and AI does too"

I think that's necessary in a capitalist society, but ideally creation wouldn't be dependent upon compensation at all, it could be freely created without concern for obtaining subsistence. Copyright law is an extension of the part of capitalism I would ideally like to abolish

I also disagree that AI has any such right (or would need it in the same hypothetical). Not only do I not believe AI would be sentient, even if it was, it wouldn't be beholden to the same power dynamics of individuals anyway.

Socialism is the only way AI fits in the civilization

I think this very well may be true.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

If it’s your personal AI instance and you train it on books you own, and only you use it, I don’t see the problem.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] lloram239@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

See Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc..

Google won.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments